\w
m
rag
1
in
B
Kg
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2013
http://archive.org/details/earlyhistoryofox03park
THE
EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD
727-IIOO
QxERtfoiUSClK£.
Jptkekmeo/jabk/ o«n«U Attf cfuixt«£tnit, j>annu
fan aiem-M-tSi7 yi.(evuM''mclUf.(lotnm o Al^aro
pcA&.&umao rndnw cue infet outcttr jiabeW:'
^/ turt&o «ar<kK-'in ccpi'dt^me .' Wi*jcnfef.xtf . »%W
dTeo Jj oiwi* aluf. uel. txc. ld> fcabajf fton.twowf ajftjfci .
HW ya&r<**Cll£n>Hfr-.l*- Itk'ainainm&^iXftwitfpt. .
~In ipfa tulU-« tnqa maru <jua ^cna ♦FiCC-.Ttft •»)•&»"
fraient^apw./ettipaf'hif fS^bt ant^emc^am-yoou.nMn.
to. ua!fe7bmrua& <}J jjtfe •non yoRc xeAJtefe.
^jtpc fc.fr. tnaufujucf tnujtttef ^«p juer.Ct^wi . <Ll.
jtan&waitfum t»r «*^ vi."iat. £tw a> Sci^hjw./jIia tfcr
\xpps.Jti. ataf ie.uij .WjtWjilittfwiewluefciti^u
k^.Vnawfof.fuajk. ^ittm|*|i«ent<
, tw<anr mutalef tnarfwti'. Jja fi op fuvttr/tec^dftc
> ■&(%$ teniae ■d&cufeom mn.\>p&,.~Jui.max\{umi$.
^•&a ut' a> feufdir^ falls', £U£!
' mj. k uafijr;/| j,a ^innwi tt-Tnanf j-a&t. l*« • fen* £v t'tf
m.fruaftr/'Efs DawcTxvui-nunf>erl3r xw-GA-puybert;
ifcJiif.im.jriufk /Iff Uncjfc' !??..»«. in W.feli^
WSI vxuj. W. 6« W una uafta.£
Jb mra'W&mref ttr- ir- manf. yvb&af. v. felii'
^W&f t>«ml- mt.wiant: rtd&fowu. W.fxW/i. fr«afc.
<G3*#ajSr utceww .tt. •manOan . ^al^rsT. </. 0j£.
3) ecm^li^lAmx . l.jnjmfan ■ ye&X fn. W
4h&atetfym.u. nunf. yd3cc$.jc«. Aenxx?
J^jef^rW^w. tnanf j^^^wj.W. £*W.«t- Puaftr.
kannulf pXiUjtf una manf nilfafefe.
>(AHf lr'twjAl«r.^.ie»i^ SpisuJieUri^.i mans. ^ fltI v^.
felMaif.j.imane*£{uc nil vt^A. H<ira»n<y/",r Leueuavj*.
manfi^n raLfe.^^f»UcL^ir.ai)»fru*lftr. ^W,
JetVic i mans'mfendfc^i' ^eremana.manf^iyai.
5 aniatuin • t.wws ^ue nil j^f. '^.tSiwn. i . mans fltty^.
t>W.i.ir»a«& ml ^ifou«OTiarj.«. maris ie.^m. ben?.
Sewut. t- mans fittfeS& WfM<i, i.mar,^ uiftix'ie.xlbenf'ft.t
itttcoa-t.mans ic-y^ben. iluuar^i m*H5 S«i^ena^f
^Jdurw.i-tnanSui^*' ^atfiTi «T?fuewmur«*reuap*'.
So,
4tuum ■
^ocuirn'^ ann. t-rfi nw i>u o^uf.^p cu fi&et'
fwa v^nr.
:Kiepfc
■.lepfcarauaricni
•li»«€ -|3& v¥jtma>nienfi&-
rtlij.C^6 %anfWtenri5.
'^' at5 ^'"^^nfts.
.w^ews Dax4><en»i*.
.xi-Afct>aoa^e*i
•M\ Itkiaa ic PtatrUiA .
•jali t «tt « V*\>nifu tianfu-
• jdi-Ganoma »e^wncfcr4
7al« dwia •
•>i<tomef Hugo.
•.^vt'itomefmorttOTHmgif.
- |Comef tibtfouf.
Comd'Et^Miaf,
v ^/aWrtuf^ri.
Witts
^eu)iel.
nto>turt<» . it. manfwn - foi&ef..w,S€naj\
CWj^^*i^iXW|.manf,|^iwi.f<»{f.^cliif.vu. f^uaf^- '
VtajxWWkutta»»»p(Wv&aJi'i A»nor9nr-6.eK.«5Ji).Vfl3r xv?8tt^»"
fOT^tnxSm^ e^urT lU^umwanfj^^W.ifctytfdW -javj.hiSo ie Ion.
1 laTi^lJc'.i.tnanf rcJiMt-Wmrt aiUrone. WiWianafli- Jtr -^ jKoKrtuT^e *ra4fot^.
\fl<<wf p^fmwiWtvifpiiaafmanfwnpTttlrtfar •J9W*bq*ufie#%t.
©^^Mef^wca^in«e<lef^&.E.tiVqjwrai^i ov-R.aiulHJcJnoftcm^.
•«xwi- S- tcarwuS »e turn-
•xeti\i KicAftiuf ^am^tani.
■ ;xwtwjD wenger ^K'Twfew-
•^ccw-HtU) stifym.
•joocvrtf^-tMLj firi.nMf •
•juecvikfc lrtcbejtwf 'icgaw.
AW^feotffrAuf ie »\anncujler.
•>:t • i rruxtfuf ir tteTiin^r.
•xtv g^uuariofieSan^ejner.
•^lil-|uam ui«c«>Tnef'.
•aiv. %abzrtwr ^ on* .
•xlvdApUes ftUuf manne
.^9f R cintateuf.
I « • (^ fbernof <njam.
t</»t,af«^maferft^
tjjcTlena.'Wtlfiwm
THE
EARLY HISTORY
OF
OXFORD
72 7- I IOO
PRECEDED BY A SKETCH OF THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN
OF THE CITY AND UNIVERSITY
BY
JAMES PARKER, Hon. M.A. Oxon.
©*forb
PRINTED FOR THE OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1885
[All rights reserved]
PA
097
v.3
©if ori
PRINTED BY HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
PREFACE.
An apology is due to the subscribers to the Oxford Historical
Society for the somewhat tardy appearance of this volume. In
acceding to the request of my friend Mr. Madan to compile a sum-
mary of the historical material on which the Early History of Oxford
was based, I did not at the moment quite realise what I had under-
taken. In 187 1 I had printed a series of notes on the Early History
of Oxford, which had been arranged for a lecture delivered before the
Oxford Architectural and Historical Society, Feb. 28 in that year.
A few copies only were printed, and presented to such members of
the Society and friends as seemed to be interested in the subject ; but
it was not published, because I felt that the notes were imperfect,
and hoped at some future time to revise them, and fill in certain
details which were wanting.
For instance, I gave but a few lines to the mythical history of
Oxford, intending on some other occasion to work out the 'Greek-
lade/ the 'Mempric' and 'Alfred' myths, all of which seemed to be-
long to the same category, and to have been made the basis of most
of what had then been written on the early history of Oxford ; and I
dismissed the story of S. Frideswide also, in a page or so, but knew that
I had not done justice to a subject which was so intimately connected
with that early history. My notes began practically with the year 912,
and although the true history of Oxford, in the full acceptance of the
term, does not begin till that date, still I felt that the commencement
at this period was somewhat abrupt, and that some preliminary notes
were wanted upon the part which the district of Oxford had played in
earlier history. Lastly, I felt that in so briefly chronicling the passages
in which the name of Oxford occurred or which referred in any way
to Oxford, I had treated them too narrowly, and that I ought to have
shown their bearing upon the general history of the country.
The purport, however, of my pamphlet of 187 1 was to bring into
prominence not only what we knew of the early history, but how we
knew it, in contradistinction to the mythical stories which had grown
up around recorded facts ; and such digressions would have been far
vi PREFACE.
beyond the limits of the seventy-eight pages which that pamphlet
occupied, and these in themselves were already an undue expansion
of the notes of the hour's lecture.
But when the compliment was paid to me by the Committee of the
new Oxford Historical Society in asking me to contribute some notes
upon the early history of my native city, and when it was suggested
that practically what was required of me was an expansion of the
notes of 1 87 1, I accepted, somewhat rashly, the task, being glad of
the opportunity which would thus be afforded of carrying out my
previous intention, but not anticipating either the labour, or the
amount of time it would involve. I found, however, that after the
lapse of fourteen years much which was in my mind then had been
forgotten, and further, that when I began to build on what had been
then somewhat hastily put together, I could not work satisfactorily
without going down to the foundations, and in most parts without
building de novo. Besides this, I found the digression upon the mythical
history involved a larger amount of new reading and research than
I had anticipated: not that the results would lead the reader to suppose
this, but such was the fact, since in choosing what seemed to be the
salient points much had to be read and sifted which was productive
of nothing worth recording. Although there was little to alter in the
conclusions expressed in a few short paragraphs in the pamphlet of
1 87 1, the exposition of the evidence in detail, and in such a way as to
bring the points clearly before the reader, and yet not to be guilty of
injustice to the work of those who had followed different lines of
research from my own, involved a considerable expenditure of time
in searching for passages and verifying references.
Again, although I thought it would be a comparatively easy matter
to treat the passages which were quoted as touching upon Oxford in
connection with the general history of the country, I found myself
constantly obliged to enter upon controverted matters. It is one thing
to put on paper one's own views, but another to give fairly and fully
the chapter and verse for the evidence on which those views are
based. This again occupied more of the limited time at my disposal
than was anticipated. Hence the delay in the issue of the volume ; and
I venture to plead the above circumstances as an excuse for the
non-fulfilment of my pledge to the Committee as to time, not as a
justification.
It is true, that as regards the later chapters, Professor Freeman's
grand historical work on the Norman Conquest, which had been com-
pleted since my notes were published in 1871, affords a rich quarry
PREFACE. vii
from which to obtain material, but the system I had adopted, namely
of relying upon the original authorities independently of what use had
been made of them by later historians, prevented my availing myself so
much of this valuable work as I should otherwise have done. I have,
however, in consulting that work often found occasion to add to my
notes, and in one or two cases to modify my original conclusions.
At the same time I have to confess that upon some of the contro-
verted points treated in the following pages, I have allowed the con-
clusions at which I had arrived, independently of Professor Freeman's
work, to remain as written. I hold for instance, that the evidence
points strongly in favour of Oxford being the scene of Eadmund's
death in 1016; but I am not convinced that the evidence which he
has adduced for William's march through Wallingford and Berkhamp-
stead, and for connecting the Oxford district with that march, is suffi-
cient to support his conclusions. Again, as to the supposed siege of
Oxford, I have by no means followed his work as my guide ; in laying
considerable stress upon the temporising policy of Harold at the
important Gemot at Oxford in 1065, and upon the traitorous character
of Eadwin and Morkere's conduct on that occasion ; upon the rebel
character of the mob which they led, and upon Harold's unwise
sacrifice of Tostig in the hope of appeasing them, I find that I have
followed a different line of argument from that adopted by Professor
Freeman ; but the circumstances, here given in detail, and on which
I have relied so much, seemed to me to bring out the importance of
the part which the decision of the Oxford Gemot played in the history
of the Norman Conquest, as well as to account for that great destruc-
tion of houses at Oxford which had taken place at some time before
the Domesday Survey, and which has been accepted as the chief
evidence of a siege of Oxford being one of the incidents of William's
march either before his coronation or afterwards.
Although in this expansion of the material given in the little
brochure of 1871, I have now treated it much more from an historical
point of view, and attempted to show the place which Oxford seems to
have held in the general history of the country, I have not lost sight
of one of the purposes with which the original treatise was compiled,
namely, to point out clearly the sources of the history. I have, as far
as possible, given the chapter and verse for all the statements, and
searched, as a rule, for the earliest form in which the statement
occurs, and, where necessary, shown the evidence of the expansion of it
by later historians. In detailing the character and date of the his-
torian followed, and the nature of the MSS. on which reliance is
viii PREFACE.
placed I am conscious of having inserted details wmch i must be edious
to the reader, as this part of the work has been oftentm.es ted cu
o n v. but if one of the chief objects of the Oxford Htstonca!
Socie be to provide ready access to the material on whtch the
h° ory Oxford rests, then a full description of the references, so
tit cry quotation can be readily verified as well as read m connec-
tion vi h its context and its value determined, will not be out of place.
Thee was one difficulty, and this was in decidmg whether the
p Jsa'es quoted should be given in the original or m a transla ,om
For mv own part I would, of course, have preferred to have been
SevTd o 1 e ask of turning medieval Latin into English, but on the
o the hand, it was thought that the work would be useful to a large
chs of readers if, in the course of the book itself, the chief passages
given in English, and if the originals were printed m an appendix
0 hat scholars would not be deprived of a ready opportun, of
eference I have felt a satisfaction in this latter part of the plan,
Tuch as, though my blunders are thus exposed, ■»«£• —
can or, at least, should be misled by them, when he ha the original
before him by which to correct them. In translating, I may add
?ave as far as possible attempted to follow closely the original, at the
expense sometimes perhaps of even intelligible English. In respect
oP he rendering 2 J Anglo- Saxon Chronicle I have followed
1 beleve, almost uniformly the late Mr. Thorpe's translation, and as
e dne or two charters I will here take the opportunity of
XowleTging the kind assistance of Professor Earle in revising my
"£!£ the originals, where they have been already printed, I have
fol owed the best texts available, and in some few cases I have com-
p elthem with the MSS, with those issued in the Rolls Series, this
of course was not needed. In certain cases I have supplied various
reading especially of proper names; and though such will not be
found o be of much value in themselves, they may help sometimes to
Sow the source whence the chronicler or the transcriber derived his
"TmJ here too say that I have retained the name of ■ Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle' or 'Chronicles,' using sometimes one form sometimes the
other occasion required. If it is recognised that Here was a series
ofcnronicles, though as regards the early parts of all ta-d- £
Terms Abingdon Chronicle, Peterborough Chronicle, *,, which
PREFACE. ix
names, to say the least, rest on no very satisfactory basis, while they
are open to the objection of creating confusion between them and
chronicles which bear commonly the same or at least very similar
names.
Some exception may perhaps be taken to the titles and to the
division of some of the chapters, but the following circumstances must
be borne in mind. The foundation of S. Frideswide's in 727 seemed
to require a chapter to itself, and therefore left the period before and
afterwards, which otherwise should have been treated as one, to be
divided into two parts, and it was difficult to make any real distinction
in the titles of the two chapters IV. and VI. It was thought, how-
ever, that while speaking of the site of Oxford in one, it was only right
to speak of the town of Oxford in the other, the recorded foundation of
S. Frideswide providing the line of demarcation. Again, it was thought
that the event described under the year 912, and the circumstances
which appeared to surround it, such as the formation of the county,
and the general history of the fortification of the town against the
Danes, would justify separating the period of the Danish incursions
(and giving that title to Chapter VII.) from the period of the Danish
invasions, leaving that title for Chapter VIII. It seemed, also, con-
venient to embrace in this one chapter the latter part of the reign of
iEthelred the Unready, beginning, as far as Oxford was concerned,
with the massacre there in 1002 as a detail in the unhappy policy
of that unwise monarch, which culminated in the accession of Cnut
to the English throne; and with his agreement made at the Oxford
Gemot of 10 18 the chapter practically closes.
As it has been thought useful to refer to the ecclesiastical history of
the district as well as the political, I have grouped, as far as possible,
such events as belong to the tenth, or to the early part of the eleventh
century, respectively under the two chapters above named.
After the accession of Cnut, it seemed impossible to group the
events which followed under any very definite title, and thus the
general one of ' Forty years before the Norman Conquest' was
adopted for Chapter IX. At the same time, since this chapter
practically closes with the account of the Oxford Gemot in 1065, the
decision of which is shown to have played an important part in hasten-
ing that Conquest, the title is not without some meaning. Taking the
Norman Conquest in the limited sense — that is, including the events of
the three months between the battle near Hastings and the coronation
at Christmas, 1066, and viewing the battles fought afterwards in the
light of the suppression of rebellion — the division is a convenient one.
x PREFACE.
The twenty years which succeed this event give an opportunity of
explaining the reasons why the theory of a siege of Oxford is re-
jected and of recording the advent of Robert D'Oilgi and what he
did for Oxford. This Chapter X. practically includes William the
Conqueror's reign.
At the very close of his reign, however, came the Domesday Survey.
This was thought to be worthy of a chapter to itself, and it is treated
somewhat fully, as it provides the data upon which it has been
attempted to base a description of Oxford at this time. Advantage
has also been taken of this separate chapter to refer to such details
respecting the plan and condition of the town or existing remains of
buildings which did not fall so readily under the historical narrative
in the previous chapter ; and also, since the Survey introduces many
names of note amongst the holders of mansions in Oxford, it has not
been thought out of place to introduce here and there such remarks as
tend to show in what way the data, afforded in the Oxford Domesday,
illustrate the general history of the confiscation and distribution of
the land throughout the country by William the Conqueror.
This then forms Chapter XI, and with that chapter it has been
thought well to bring to a close this contribution to the Early History
of Oxford. The reign of WTilliam Rufus is a blank as regards Oxford,
and all the light which is thrown upon it comes from the Domesday
Survey, or from documents which have been introduced in illustration
of it ; so that this chapter may be said to bring down the history of
Oxford to the close of the eleventh century.
Here and there, for the sake of illustrations to the descriptive
portion, I have trenched somewhat upon the charters and other
material belonging to the next century ; but I have avoided as far as
possible entering upon any of the historical questions which distinctly
belong to it.
Throughout the treatise I have attempted to deal fairly with the
facts before me. I have not thought it my duty to magnify the
importance of Oxford — a duty which the majority of local historians
seem to consider as devolving upon them. If in places I have dismissed
popular and interesting traditions as untenable, I trust by bringing
together a fuller summary than has yet been done of records which
exist, I have built up, so to speak, as much as I have pulled down ;
and if I have not surrounded Oxford with a mysterious halo of glory,
and contended for an antiquity which there is no reason to suppose
it possessed, I still hope I may have done something to show the posi-
tion which Oxford really occupied in the early history of the country.
PREFACE. xi
A tolerably full alphabetical index of places and persons named in
the course of the book has been given, An alphabetical index of
subjects I have, as a rule, found to be practically useless, since on the
one hand it is impossible to know for certain under what word the
subject should be indexed, and on the other hand, there cannot be many
historical subjects, if indeed there be any, which are not associated
with some known place or person, and which cannot therefore be far
more readily found in the index under such a reference ; consequently
but a few technical words, and others under which it has been thought
useful to group several references have been introduced. Moreover
the somewhat full ' Table of Contents ' will, it is anticipated, supply
a ready means of reference to the various subjects treated in the work.
But I have kept distinct an index to the books and MSS. from
which the data given in my work have been extracted, or which for
various reasons may have been quoted ; and my reason for doing
this is because I have laid so great a stress upon the importance of
knowing whence we derive the facts on which we depend for our
history. Scattered throughout the pages of a somewhat long index
of names and places, the list of authorities would scarcely fulfil its
purpose ; but arranged as it is, besides exhibiting the sources whence
that which has been stated is deduced, it exhibits also in a measure
what has not been explored or made use of. By turning to this index
the student or any historian of Oxford who may make use of the material
here brought together, can see at once what new ground he will have
to explore or how far the ground already explored has been properly
dealt with. I am aware that this conspectus may expose my short-
comings, just as the printing of the originals exposes my errors in
translation; but if it advances in any way the true study of the history
of Oxford I shall be only too pleased that both are exposed.
Besides the Appendix of Documents (A), already referred to, it has
been thought worth while to add a few pages upon the name of
Oxford (B), upon the disputed question of Alfred's coins (C), a brief
description of the plates (D) which the courtesy of the Committee
have permitted me to add to the book ; and finally, as a last appendix
(E), such minor additions, and one or two corrections, which have
suggested themselves to me in reading the work through after it was
printed for the purpose of making the index.
I cannot conclude these remarks without tendering my acknowledg-
ments to the Committee of the Oxford Historical Society — first, for the
honour which they did me in asking me to contribute such a treatise to
their undertaking, and next for the patience and courtesy with which
xii PREFACE.
they have treated my delay in completing the work, a delay however
which, with my many engagements, I found to be unavoidable. To
Mr. Madan also my thanks are especially due for the kind manner
in which he has met so many of my suggestions, though his patience
must have been tried by my slow progress, and for the assistance
which in several matters he has afforded me during the revision of the
proofs. I am also requested to tender the thanks of the Committee,
with which I would join my own, to Col. Taylor and Mr. Basevi
Sanders, of the Ordnance Survey, Southampton, for the facilities
afforded in reproducing the facsimile of the page of the Domesday
Survey relating to Oxford, which appears as the frontispiece.
The Turl, Oxford,
October, 1885.
Apage igitur illos Cantabrigiensium Libros Nigros, necnon Higdeni,
Bruntonii, Rudburni, Rossii, et aliorum recentiorum deliria ; credamus
tantum eis quae fidem merentur; nee cum Pueris delectemur fabulis
Antiquis novisse l.
If I should lose time to reckon up the vaine allegations produced for the
Antiquity of Oxford by Twyne, and of Cambridge by Caius, I should but
repeat Deliria senum ; for I account the most of that they have published
in print to be no better2.
1 From the preface to Smith's Annals of University College, ed. 1728, p. x.
2 Speech of Sir Simon D'Ewes, Knight, in the Long Parliament, Jan. 2,
1 640-1641.
ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I. Introductory.
PAGE
The question at what date the History of Oxford begins I
(i) The ' mythical ' history ascribes the origin of the town to Mempric,
B.C. 1009 ; of the University to the arrival of Greek philosophers
at Greeklade, at an uncertain date, or to the supposed foundation
by King Alfred in A. D. 873 1
(2) The * theoretical' origin of the town would be the arrival of certain
settlers, their names and date of settlement being unknown . 2
(3) The ' legendary' history ascribes the foundation of a nunnery here
by S. Frideswide to A.D. 727 2
(4) The ' actual' recorded history begins with A. D. 912, when King
Eadward the Elder took possession of Oxford .... 2
The proposed plan of dealing with these different views of history . . 3
CHAPTER II. The Mythical Origin of Oxford.
John Rous at the close of the fifteenth century the first historian to combine
the myths about Oxford into a connected series ..... 5
His story of the foundation by Mempric, B. c. 1009 ; the successive names of
Oxford ; the transference from Greeklade to Beaumont ; and thence
to within the walls of Oxford ........ 5
Illustration of Rous's critical faculty in weighing evidence ; e. g. his reference
to the Noachian Deluge 6
Geoffrey of Monmouth's fiction of the twelfth century as to a certain Mempric
expanded and connected with Oxford by Rous 7
Examples of Geoffrey and Rous's habit of inventing names of persons to fit
different places 8
Rous fits the mythical history of Cambridge on to a passage from Geoffrey's
romance in the same way he does that of Oxford 9
The Oxford Historiola, which ascribes the foundation of the University to
Greek philosophers arriving at Greeklade 10
Greeklade is but a perversion of Cricklade, of which the history is fairly
well known 11
Nor is there any difficulty as to the origin of the name 12
Rous obtained part of his story from this ' Historiola ,' since he was in his
youth a scholar at Oxford 12
xiv CONTEA TS.
The origin of his story of Oxford being once situated at Ikaumont derived
from the erroneous passage in the Hyde Abbey Chronicle of the close
of fat fourteenth century 1 3
The Chronicon fornallensc, also late in the fourteenth century, has the story
of Bede and of Bishop Felix founding Cambridge ; also the story of a
school at Greeklade for Greek scholars and at Lechlade for Latin
scholars r
Notes adduced to prove that Leland believed in these myths . ■ • i° •
Of the other myths raised on an etymological basis ; origin of the name
Bellesitum
The names of Caer-bossa, oiRidohen, Boso Dcvadoboum, Boso Ridocencis, &c.
all attributable to Geoffreys invention of names in his Romance, when
he comes to the story of King Arthur 1 7
The Cambridge controversy as to the relative antiquity of the two Univer-
sities, in which the above myths are marshalled as history ... 20
The literature of the subject:— (1) A book by John Caius of Cambridge,
styling himself * Londinensis,' entitled 'De Antiquitate Cantab. Acad-
emiae, libri duo: together with (2) a treatise (to which it was supposed
to be an answer) by Thomas Caius of Oxford, entitled ' Assertio Anti-
quitatis Oxoniensis Academiae; both printed by John Caius in 1568 . 20
A reprint after the death of John Caius of the two books, together with (3)
a general history of the University of Cambridge, entitled Historic Canta-
brigiensis Academiae, in 1574 (the whole probably edited by Archbishop
Parker) '* "
The treatises (1) and (2), together with (4), a MS. treatise in reply to the
first by Thomas Caius of Oxford, entitled,' Animadversiones: printed by
Hearne under the title of ' Vindiciae Antiquitatis Academiae Oxoniensis;
2}
I73O
The speech of the Cambridge Orator (William Masters) in 1564 on Queen
Elizabeth's visit to Cambridge, the origin of the controversy . . - 24
The speech based upon a memorandum given to the Orator by < Antiquary,'
supposed to be John Caius 3
The passage refers to the story in the Cambridge Black Book of a certain
Cantaber coming over from Spain 2^
The argument used by the Cambridge Orator 25
The manner in which Thomas Caius the Oxonian meets the arguments of the
Cambridge Orator' is first by attacking the story of ' Cantaber,' and
next by supporting the story of the transference from Greeklade to
Oxford found in the Historiola. He supposes that the transference took
place under King Alfred
Incidental references to the antiquity of Oxford ; e. g. from Walter Burley s
treatise on Aristotle
The Cambridge champion, after giving the letter of ■ Antiquary » and the
Orator's speech above referred to, replies by supporting the Cambridge
story of Cantaber, which he shows has as much authority as the Oxford
story of Alfred . . • • • • ■ ■ '.'.,'
He next attacks the fiction about Greeklade given in the Oxford Historiola . 29
Then certain details as to Bellosiium, Ridohen, &c -3°
CONTENTS. xv
PAGE
Then the discrepancies as to when the Greeklade schools were transferred to
Oxford 31
He next attacks the authorities employed by the Oxford controversialists in
support of their theories, and even that of Alfred founding the Univer-
sity 32
For the sake of comparison an outline of the Cambridge fiction is given from
the Cambridge Histo'riola in the Black Book, supposed to be compiled
by Nicholas Cantelupe in the fifteenth century. The story of Cantaber
and King Guiguntius is to be compared with that of Mempric . . 34
The other Cambridge myths in connection with King Sigbert and Bishop
Felix, which may be compared with the Oxford myth of King Alfred . 36
The Cambridge stories of Lucius, Constantine, and King Arthur in connection
with the University 37
The charters granted by King Arthur and others to Cambridge . . .38
A consideration of the controversy as a whole 39
An edition of Asser issued by Archbishop Parker in 1574, showing that the
contemporary of King Alfred knew nothing of Oxford, much less of
Alfred founding it 39
A rival edition issued in 1603 under Camden's auspices, with a passage
directly referring to Oxford and King Alfred's interest and influence
therein 40
There is clear evidence that the only ancient copy of Asser, viz. that in the
Cottonian Library (but burnt in 1731), did not contain the passage . 40
The passage first appears in Camden's Britannia, printed in 1600, and trans-
ferred to his edition of Asser, although in the preface he professes to
have followed Archbishop Parker's edition 41
Some existing correspondence shows that Twyne and others had doubts about
the passage, though Twyne implies that Archbishop Parker deliberately
omitted it from his edition 42
Twyne's interview with Camden in 1622, in which Camden implies he had
followed a MS. temp. Richard II, with the passage in it . . -43
The passage supposed to have been supplied to Camden by Sir Henry Savile 43
A summary of the evidence as to Camden's interpolation .... 45
The passage relating to King Alfred and the University of Oxford in the Hyde
Abbey Chronicle 45
The passage in full respecting King Alfred and Oxford and Grimbald's
Crypt ; first appearing in this edition of Camden's Britannia issued 1600,
and afterwards in his edition of Asser 1603 46
Ralph Higden (who died 1363), in his Polychronicon, refers to King Alfred
founding schools at Oxford -47
The Chronicon Jornallense (fourteenth century) similarly refers to King Alfred
founding his schools at Oxford . 47
The mistaken reference to William of Malmesbury — really to John of Glaston-
bury, who wrote his Chronicle after 1456 48
Rudborn, in his Historia Major, compiled circa 1440, refers to Alfred founding
Oxford, and sending his son Ethelward there 49
Rous treats the myth of Alfred as he treated that of Mempric, by expansion
and addition of other circumstances ....... 49
xvi CONTENTS.
PAGB
He makes three different Colleges to have been founded by Alfred . . 5°
The difference between the two myths; one that Alfred founded Oxford, the
other that Alfred restored a previous foundation 51
Chronological and other objections to the story that Alfred founded Oxford . 51
University College the result of the incorporation of certain masters enjoying
the bequest of William of Durham in 1249 of 3"> marks • • • 52
The account of that foundation, in which there is no mention of Alfred's name
directly or indirectly 53
But in 1363 University College acquires property which led to certain law-
suits ; . ; * 54
In 1 379, in order to obtain a verdict from the Court of Appeal in their favour,
they invented the plea that their College was founded by King Alfred . 54
The French petition and its results °*
Further pleadings t • • * '
The Alfred story introduced again in 1427 in the suit with the Abbot ot
Oseney . „
Bryan Twyne's Apologia, 1608
He takes up the Elizabethan controversy and goes over all the points raised
by John Caius, and adduces other arguments in favour of the antiquity
of Oxford * * 59
His reference to the German astronomers of 1552 and 1574. viz. Feter
Appianus and Cyprian Leowitz, quoted by Ingram as if they were
Appian and S. Cyprian .
Further arguments adduced by Twyne .....
Hearne follows on in the same strain
Followed by Ingram and numerous later writers . •
The myths more or less apparent in all books relating to the history of
The thousandth anniversary of the foundation by King Alfred celebrated at
University College in 1872 .
CHAPTER III. The Site of Oxford during the British and
Roman Settlement.
The site of Oxford wanting in the requirements of a British settlement . . 63
Scant remains of British times found in Oxford 4
Nearest points of British remains 4
The Roman roads in the neighbourhood, viz. on the south, the great road
from London to Bath via Pontes and Spinae, and on the north, the
65
Akeman Street ,,
The cross road southward from Alchester to Dorchester •
The traces of the ancient roads in the immediate vicinity of Oxford . .67
The British trackways *."•*,"
The early years of the Roman occupation of this district as gleaned from the
Classical historians
CONTENTS. xvii
PAGE
The absence of historical data during the remainder of their occupation . 74
The Roman villas and numerous traces of Roman occupation in the neigh-
bourhood of Oxford, but not in Oxford itself ..... 74
CHAPTER IV. The Site of Oxford during the Saxon Settle-
ment TO THE CLOSE OF THE SEVENTH CENTURY,
The gradual occupation of the Oxford district by the Saxons during the sixth
century . 80
Especial mention of Ensham and Benson, A. D. 571 81
The site of Oxford at the close of the sixth century in the midst of one great
West Saxon kingdom which stretched from the sea on the south to
Northumbria on the north 82
The rise of the Mercian kingdom in the first quarter of the seventh century,
and Wessex contracted to the district south of the Thames ... 83
The site of Oxford therefore on the southern border of Mercia, A. d. 628 . 83
The encroachment of Mercia upon the kingdom of Wessex as far as ^Escesdun,
A. D. 661 . . . .84
The site of Oxford well within the Mercian dominions .... 84
At the close of the century the site, though still in Mercia, probably again on
the southern border 85
CHAPTER V. The Foundation of S. Frideswide's Nunnery,
a.d. 727.
The probabilities of the truth of the tradition considered by a survey of
surrounding circumstances 86
The Mercian king a Christian 87
Nunneries had begun to be founded before the close of the seventh century,
and examples of the same 87
The circumstances of the foundation of a neighbouring Nunnery at Abingdon
circa A. d. 675 .89
The removal of the Nuns to Wytham, close to Oxford 90
The material existing for the story of the foundation of S. Frideswide's
Nunnery . .91
The recital of the story of the foundation prefixed to the charter of refound-
ation of the monastery a. d. 1004 92
Independent testimony to the existence of this charter c. 11 25 by William of
Malmesbury, and his version of the story of the foundation ... 93
The story of the foundation as told in two different ' Lives of the Virgin ' . 95
A comparison of the details of the two stories with each other, and with the
prefatory story to the Charter, and with the story as handed down by
William of Malmesbury 95
96
97
98
98
S. Frideswide's parents and her early instruction ; her desire for a nun's life
She founds a Nunnery at Oxford ; her temptations .
Algar, king of Leicester, pursues her
In one story his servants are struck blind, in another the king himself .
b
.Will
CONTENTS.
S. Frideswide escapes to Binscy (or Benson)
She takes refuge in a hut • .'."..'
Her miracles; the cure of the blind girl ; of the woodman 8 paralysed hand,
of the epileptic fisherman, and of the leper .
Builds an oratory at Binscy, near Seacourt .
Her death and burial ■
Notes upon the name of S. Frideswide
The introduction of the name Algar .
The difficulties as to the name Bcntonia, whether Bampton or Benson .
The probabilities are perhaps in favour of Binsey being meant .
A general view of the whole, however, points to the establishment of a
religious community in and also near Oxford early in the eighth century
CHAPTER VI. Oxford a Border-town during the Eighth
Ninth Centuries.
PAGB
98
99
99
100
100
102
102
103
104
105
AND
Oxford may now be spoken of by name • •
Situated on the Thames, it is a border-town between the two kingdoms of
Mercia and Wessex ' ' '
The capture of Somerton, A.D. 733, by the Mercian King Ethelbald, probably
has no reference to this district •
The battle of Burford, a. D. 75*, implies that the West Saxons under King
Cuthred conquered the southern part of Mercia, and Oxford was again
within the West Saxon kingdom • ■
The Battle of Benson, a. D. 777, implies that the Mercian King Offa won
back to Mercia all that his predecessor had lost . . . • •
The Mercian conquest stretched southward to the long range of the Berk-
shire hills between Wallingford and Ashbury, so that Oxford was again
well within the Mercian territory ,'rmi'
Ashbury seems to mark the county boundary between Berkshire and Witt-
shire " ,
Under Egbert, who succeeded a. D. Soo, the West Saxon power progressed,
and that of Mercia declined, and the foundation of the one kingdom
being laid. Oxford ceased to be a border town
107
107
no
108
109
no
CHAPTER VII.
The Danish Incursions in the Ninth and
Tenth Centuries.
The Danes began their ravages in Wessex a. D. 832. In 851 they ventured
as far up the Thames as London, reaching Reading in 871 .
Their further progress checked by the battle of iEscesdun, a. D. 871
The details of the battle of /Escesdun .
King Alfred is not recorded to have visited Oxford at all
King Eadward takes possession of Oxford a.d. 91 2
It is presumed that at this time Oxford was fortified .
The Castle mound the chief fortification
The natural advantages of Oxford as regards fortification
The general aspect of the town of Oxford at this date .
"3
114
115
116
116
117
117
118
119
CONTENTS. xix
PAGE
The road from the north into Oxford and that from the south over ' the ford'
meet in the centre of Oxford 120
The growth of Oxford round that centre whence roads went east and west . 121
S. Martin's at Carfax the first church built in the centre . . . .121
The other parishes congregated round it 122
On the authority of the earliest record of Oxford, i. e. under A. d. 912, in the
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle 122
The various editions of the Chronicle 123
A. The Winchester Chronicle in C. C. C. Cambridge. No. CLXXIII.
Earlier portion of the Ninth century.
B. The Canterbury Chronicle in the Cottonian Library. Tiber. A. VI.
Earlier portion of the Tenth century.
C. The Abingdon Chronicle in the Cottonian Library. Tiber. B. I.
Eleventh century.
D. The Worcester Chronicle in the Cottonian Library. Tiber. B. IV.
Eleventh century.
E. The Peterborough Chronicle in the Bodleian Library. Laud. 636.
Twelfth century.
F. Another Chronicle in the Cottonian Library. Domit. A. VIII.
Twelfth century.
Some account of the chroniclers who chiefly copy the above, viz. Florence of
Worcester, writing before 11 18; Simeon of Durham, before 11 20;
Henry of Huntingdon, in 11 35 ; Geoffrey of Gaimar, c. 1150 . . 125
On the meaning to be attached to the expression ' took possession of Oxford,'
in the Chronicle A. d. 912 127
The probable origin of the county of Oxford 129
The existence of the various Wessex shires, and their nomenclature . .129
The demarcation of the Mercian shires, and their nomenclature after the
central towns 131
The year 912 sees Oxford both a fortified town and the centre of a shire . 134
yElfward, King Eadward's son, dies at Oxford a. d. 924 .... 135
Supposed to have been a studious man . ■ "• 136
The policy of Eadward as regards Mercia carried on by his three sons, 925-
955 136
On the death of Eadred, a. D. 975, dissensions begin, and the Danes, taking
advantage of the same, again ravage the kingdom . . . .137
The ecclesiastical history of the district during the tenth century . ... 138
The diocese of Dorchester and the Bishops of the same . . . .138
S. Frideswide's monastery and the supposed expulsion of the monks and intro-
duction of secular canons . . . . . . . . .139
The synod near Oxford at Kyrtlington, and death of the Bishop of Crediton
there 140
CHAPTER VIII. Oxford during the Danish Invasion in the
EARLY PART OF THE ELEVENTH CENTURY.
The disastrous reign of yEthelred the Unready 141
The massacre of S. Brice, and how it affected Oxford, A. d. 1002 . . .141
b %
xx CONTENTS.
FACE
The story told in the Cartulary of S. Frideswide, and the restoration of
S. Frideswide's monastery in 1004 H2
The lands there given or confirmed to S. Frideswide's 143
The signatures to iEthelred's charter agree with the date 1004 . . . 144
The story as told by William of Malmesbury J44
The error of William of Malmesbury in confusing the massacre of the Danes
in 1002 with the assassination of Sigeferth and Morkere in 1015 . . 146
The story of the massacre as told by Henry of Huntingdon . . . . M7
General state of the kingdom at this time .148
The Danish invasion continued ; the Danes gain possession of the Berkshire
hills by marching to Cwichelmshloewe x49
^Ethelrcd's miserable policy continued J49
The Danes, having marched out through Chiltern, burn Oxford, a. D. 1009 . 151
They again visit Oxfordshire, A. D. 1 010 I5I
Oxford submits to the Danish King Sweyn, A.D.1013 152
The Gemot at Oxford, and Sigeferth and Morkere, the chief Thanes of the
Seven Burghs, treacherously slain there, A. D. 1 01 5 .... T53
The assassination attributed to Eadric J54
Eadric's treachery shown throughout, and its consequences . . . -155
King Ethelred dies, A. D. 1016 x57
Eadmund Ironside succeeds, and attempts to drive out the Danes . . x57
The treaty at Olney, near Gloucester, in November 1 01 6 . . . • 158
Eadmund assassinated, probably at Oxford, on his way back to London,
November 30, 1016 J58
The story as told by the chroniclers Henry of Huntingdon, William of
Malmesbury, &c J58
Consideration of the surrounding circumstances • 1 59
Reasons for supposing Henry of Huntingdon had good authority for his
statement l6°
Gemot at Oxford under King Cnut, A. D. 1018, where Danes and Angles were
unanimous for Eadgar's law l61
The Witan probably met in the Castle precincts 162
The historical associations of the Castle at this time 162
CHAPTER IX. Oxford during the Forty Years before the
Norman Conquest.
The Church of S. Martin erected, the land being granted by King Cnut to
Abingdon Abbey, 1039 l64
The nature of that grant l65
The poor condition of S. Frideswide's 1°5
A passage relating to S. Frideswide's being granted to an Abbot of Abingdon,
and the secular canons expelled, and for a time monks instituted . . 166
A passage given in Leland's Collectanea from a Rochester Chronicle
relating to the Canons of S. Frideswide's l67
CONTENTS. xxi
PAGE
The importance of Abingdon Abbey as contrasted with that of S. Frideswide,
and its acquisition of property on the Berkshire side of the river . . 168
The rise of the monastery of Ensham on the west of Oxford, originally an
adjunct to S. Mary at Stowe, Lincolnshire 170
St. Ebbe's Church at Oxford belonged to the same 170
The diocese of Dorchester and its Bishops up to the Norman Conquest . 171
Bishop Eadnoth, Bishop Ulf, and Bishop Wlfwi 172
On the death of Cnut a Gemot of the Witan at Oxford in 1036, and the claim
of Harold Harefoot and Harthacnut 173
Harold Harefoot dies at Oxford, 1039 175
Note of an incident while Harold was lying ill at Oxford . . . 175
Accession of Eadward the Confessor in 1042 176
Note respecting his birth at Islip, near Oxford 176
Division of the kingdom into Earldoms, and the question whether Oxford
was in Earl Alfgar's dominion 1 78
The Portreeve of Oxford and the Sheriff of Oxfordshire, c. 1 05 1 . . . 179
Harold, in the expedition against Gruffydd of Wales in 1063, passes through
Oxford on the way . . 180
The great Gemot at Oxford, Oct. 28, 1065, when Tostig, Harold's brother,
was outlawed, and Morkere made Earl of Northumberland . . .181
The Gemot first held at Northampton, and immediately afterwards at Oxford 182
The explanation of the change of place of meeting 182
The rebel mob accompany Morkere 183
The deplorable results of the decisions of the Gemot . . . . .183
The Danish code of laws renewed at Oxford 183
Eadward the Confessor's death, Jan. 5, 1066 184
King Harold goes to help Eadwine and Morkere against Tostig and Harold
Hardrada, while William, Duke of Normandy, lands in Sussex, Oct. 14,
1066 185
CHAPTER X. Oxford during the Twenty Years after the
Norman Conquest.
King William's march after the Battle near Hastings . . . . .186
The story as told in two of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, in Florence of
Worcester, in Simeon of Durham, and in William of Poitiers . .186
One Anglo-Saxon Chronicle takes William direct from Sussex to Beorham-
stede, where the Archbishop of York, Eadgar, and Earls Eadwine and
Morkere, meet him, and then to Westminster . . . . .187
Florence of Worcester names the counties which he ravaged on his way,
makes him go to Beorcham, where the above meet him in addition to
the Bishops of Worcester and Hereford, and then to Westminster . 187
William of Malmesbury makes him go direct to London in a royal progress,
and both the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and Eadwine and
Morkere, come to meet him 187
Henry of Huntingdon simply makes the people of London receive him
peaceably 187
i95
iy6
98
xxii ONTENTS.
F v 1
William of Poitiers makes him go to London, where he is met by a hostile
force • then to ravage Southward and afterwards to cross by a ford and
bridge to Guarengeford, where Stigaad meets him; afterwards the
people of London meet him, and then he goes to Barking . . 187
Discrepancies in the stories told by different chroniclers, and doubts as to
whether William marched near to Oxford I91
The theory based upon piecing together the several accounts and omitting
discrepancies ... •
On the supposed siege of Oxford after William's coronation . . -193
The doubts suggested from historical considerations concerning the political
status of Mercia ,."#/**•"
The evidence derived from the MSS., showing that the misreading of Oxoma
for Exonia has been the cause of the error of the statements of the
historians
A summary of the historians as to William's march to Exeter .
The error begun in the transcript of Roger of Wendover which was made for
Matthew of Westminster, the original being preserved in C. C. C.
Cambridge
On the question of an unrecorded siege . • • • ■ • '
The destruction of the large number of houses in Oxford to be accounted for
by the advent of the rebel mob on Oct. 28, 1065, rather than by an
imaginary siege by Duke William ..•••■■
Robert D'Oilgi builds, or rather strengthens, the Castle at Oxford, A. D. 1071
The probable character of his work
The policy of William in erecting castles .
Robert D'Oilgi with Roger of Ivry found the Church of S. George in the
Castle
The entries in the Oseney Annals
The English version of the Charters in the Oseney Cartulary
The "rants of land in Walton Manor
The Church of S. Mary Magdalene built outside the North gate and given to
St. George's ' '
Description of S. George's Church in the Castle-the Tower and the Crypt
The character of Robert D'Oilgi drawn by the Abingdon chronicler
He takes away from the Abbey King's Mead, which lay outside the tow
near the Castle ' '
But eventually restores it
Incidental note of his being rowed to Abingdon from Oxford
He is recorded to have repaired the Parish Churches in Oxford
The Parish Churches then in existence .
The removal of the Bishopric from Dorchester to Lincoln by Remigius
The exhibition of the relics of S. Egwin at Oxford by the Monks of Evesham
Robert D'Oilgi builds Hythe Bridge .
The entrance to Oxford from the West .
The Castle bridges
200
202
203
204
206
206
207
208
209
210
210
210
214
214
215
216
216
218
218
219
220
CONTENTS. xxiii
CHAPTER XI. The Description of Oxford in 1086 as given
in the Domesday Survey.
PAGE
The nature of the Domesday Survey and its origin . . . . .221
The probable date of its completion 222
The portion of the Survey relating to Oxford in a tabulated form . . . 223
That relating to the possessions of Robert D'Oilgi in Oxford . . -225
On the reference to the ' Time of King Eadward ' 226
The payments to the King and Earl ^Elfgar, T. K. E. . . . .226
Summary of the numbers of the houses held by tenants whose names are given 227
The probable population, based upon the number of houses . . .228
The increase of the population in Oxford every ten years during the present
century, and the relative increase of houses . . . . . .229
A table showing houses and population within and without the city wall in
1801 and 1881 respectively 230
The increase of Oxford entirely external to the old line of City wall . . 231
Probable character of the houses in Oxford in the eleventh century . . 232
Illustrations of the term Vastae from similar entries in Domesday concerning
other towns 233
The distinction of the domus and mansio . . . . . . . 235
The mural mansions, and the evidence that Oxford was surrounded by a
fortification of some kind . . . 236
The probable line of the City fortifications ....... 237
The King's twenty mansions ......... 238
The King's five mansions belonging to manors 239
The twelve mansions of Earl Alberic and W 239
The sixty mansions belonging to the Bishops 240
The twenty-eight mansions belonging to the three Abbeys of St. Edmund (?),
Abingdon, and Ensham 241
Notes on the foundation of Ensham Abbey from the Registers . . . 242
St. Ebbe's Church in connection with Ensham 243
The mansions belonging to the Earl of Mortain, Earl Hugh, Earl of Evreux,
and Henry of Eerrieres 244
The mansions belonging to William Peverel, Edward the Sheriff, and
Ernulph of Hesding 246
The mansions belonging to Berenger of Todeni, Milo Crispin, and Richard
of Curci 247
The mansions belonging to Robert D'Oilgi in Oxford as well as in Holywell 248
The Church of S. Peter's in the East 250
The plan of the Crypt compared with that of ancient crypts elsewhere . 252
The architectural details of the Crypt 253
The difficulties of reconciling the architectural features with the history . 254
The mansions belonging to Roger of Ivry, Rannulph Flammard, Wido of
Reinbodcurth, and Walter Gifard 255
The mansions belonging to Jermio and to the son of Manasses . . .257
xxiv CONTENTS,
PAGE
The mansion* belonging to the Priests of S. Michael's .... 258
The Church and Tower of S. Michael at Northgate 258
The question whether the work was military, as implied by the hourdes, or
ecclesiastical, as implied by the belfry windows 259
The fifteen mansions belonging to S. Frideswide's . . . . .261
The land of the Canons of S. Frideswide's in and near Oxford . . .262
The names of tenants, from the Domesday Survey, e.g. Coleman, William,
Spracheling, Wlwi, &c 264
Some of these names occur in the Abingdon Chronicle. .... 264
The names of Harding, Leveva, Ailric, and Derman, &c 267
Swetman the Moneyer 268
Sewi, Alveva, Leuric, Sawold, &c. 269
Considerations how far the mansions in the first list represent the manors in
the neighbourhood, and the others the Oxford residents . . . 271
Other names of supposed residents in Oxford derived from other sources . 273
The general appearance of Oxford at the time of the Survey . . . 275
The general aspect of the Castle and its surroundings .... 276
The effect of the ' waste' houses upon the aspect of the town . . -277
The business carried on in Oxford, the market, fairs, &c 278
The gemots and courts held in Oxford 279
The Oxford Laws enrolled in the Domesday Survey 280
How far these laws agree with those previously in force . . . .281
The Hustengs Court and Portmannimot 282
The Castle garrison 283
S. Frideswide's and the other churches 283
The eight churches recorded to be in existence by 1087 .... 284
How far Oxford was separated into Parishes according to the districts
assigned to the above churches .284
Eight additional churches named in the Charter supposed to have been
granted to S. Frideswide's by Henry I 285
The Rubrics relating to the above churches in S. Frideswide's cartulary . 285
Considerations as to S. Mildred's Church 287
As to that of S. Eadward's Church 290
As to that of S. Aldate's Church 291
As to that of S. Budoc's Church ......... 294
The streets in Oxford 297
The Bridges 298
The Mills 299
Port Meadow 300
The Sheriffs and the Port Reeves 301
The visits of William I and William II to the neighbourhood of Oxford . 303
The government of Oxford after the Norman Conquest .... 303
CONTENTS. xxv
APPENDICES.
APPENDIX A.
Passages quoted in Chapter II on the Mythical Origin of Oxford.
§ i. Rous. On Mempric and Greeklade .
§ 2. Ibid. Illustration from his treatment of the Deluge
§ 3. Geoffrey of Monmouth. Reference to Mempric .
§ 4. Ibid. Illustration of his treatment of names of places
§ 5, 6. Rous. ,, „ „
§ 7. Rous. On Ganteber the builder of Cambridge .
§ 8. Oxford Chancellors' Book. The Historia .
§ 9. Hyde Abbey Chronicle. The University outside the Northgate
§ 10. Bromton. Cambridge founded by Beda ....
§n. Leland. Passage supporting the mythical history of Oxford
§12. Geoffrey of Monmouth. Boso Devadoboum, Ridocen, &c.
§ 13. John Caius. Professes to settle the dispute as to the greater antiquity
of Oxford or Cambridge .......
§ 14. Speech of the Cambridge orator before Queen Elizabeth
§ 15. Nicholas Cantelupe. The Cambridge Historiola
§ 16. Hyde Abbey Chronicle. Foundation of the University by Alfred
§ 17. Camden's Asser. The interpolated passage in re Alfred and Oxford
§ 18. Higden's Polychronicon. Alfred and the Oxford schools .
§ 19. Bromton. Alfred and the Oxford schools
§ 20. Rudborne's Historia Major. Ethelward educated at Oxford, &c.
§21. Rous. Story of Alfred's foundation of Oxford ....
§ 22. Petition to Parliament. The Petition of University College claiming
Alfred as their founder
§ 23. Plea of Richard Witton. Master of University College asserting that
Alfred was founder
305
306
306
306
307
307
307
308
309
309
310
310
3ii
3ii
312
312
313
314
3H
315
316
Passages quoted in Chapter IV. Oxford during the Saxon
Settlement to the close of the seventh century.
§ 24. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a.d. 571. The capture of Ensham, Benson, &c. 317
§ 25. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a.d. 661. The Mercian King reaches ^Escesdun 317
Passages quoted in Chapter V. The foundation of S. Frides-
wide's Nunnery.
§ 26. Bede, Eccl. Hist. Before English nunneries were founded women were
sent abroad to be educated 3^
§ 27. Abingdon. Abbey Chronicle. The foundation of the Nunnery at
Abingdon 218
XXVI
i i WTENTS.
§ 28. Abingdon Abbey Chronicle. The nuns removed to Wytham .
§ 29. Chief charter relating to the restoration of S. Frideswide's in 1004, and
reciting the original foundation in 727
William of Malmesbury (Gest. Pont.). An account of S. Frideswide .
MS. life of S. Frideswide in Bodleian. Uer burial and enlargement of
the Church
§ 3°-
§3i-
PAGE
319
323
323
§ 32.
Annals of Winton. Queen Fritheswitha 323
Passages quoted in Chapter VI. Oxford a Border Town.
§ 33. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a.d. 777. Off a takes Benesington . . . 324
§ 34. Abingdon Abbey Chronicle. Offa takes the land from Wallingford to
Ash bury
324
Passages quoted in Chapter VII. Oxford during the Danish
Incursions in the ninth and tenth centuries.
§ 35. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a.d. 912. Eadward takes Oxford
§ 36. Florence of Worcester. >> >>
§ 37. Simeon of Durham. >> »
§ 38. Henry of Huntingdon. „ »
§ 39. Geoffrey Gaimar.
§ 40. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a.d. 924.
§41. Florence of Worcester. „ «
§ 42. William of Malmesbury (Gest. Regum). Ethehvard versed in literature
Eadward's son dies at Oxford
324
324
325
325
325
325
326
326
Passages quoted in Chapter VIII. Oxford during the Danish
invasion in the early part of the eleventh century.
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a.d. 1002. The Massacre of S. Brice . . 326
William of Malmesbury (Gest. Regum). A mixed version of the story
of S. Brice and events of 1 01 5 32
Henry of Huntingdon. The massacre of S. Brice
§ 43-
§ 44-
§45-
§46.
§47-
§48.
§ 49-
§ 5°-
§ 5i-
§ 52-
§ 53'
§ 54
The Danes march over ^Escesdun
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1006.
to Cwichelmeshlcewe
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1009.
Florence of Worcester.
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1010.
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1013.
Florence of Worcester.
William of Malmesbury (Gest. Regum).
men obey 'Sweyn's law'
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1015. The Gemot at Oxford, and Sige-
ferth and Morkere slain
Florence of Worcester. » »
The Danes burn Oxford
>> "
TEthclred's 'unreadiness' .
Oxford submits to Sweyn .
The Oxford and Winchester
327
327
328
3^8
328
328
328
329
329
CONTENTS. xxvii
PAGE
§ 55. Henry of Huntingdon. The Gemot at Oxford, and Sigeferth and
Moikere slain 329
§ 56. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1016. Eadmund dies .... 329
§ 57. Henry of Huntingdon. Eadmund treacherously murdered at Oxford . 330
§ 58. William of Malmesbury (Gest. Reguni). Eadmund treacherously
murdered 330
§ 59. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1018. 'Eadgar's law' proclaimed at
Oxford 330
Passages quoted in Chapter IX. Oxford during the forty
YEARS BEFORE THE NoRMAN CONQUEST.
§60. Abingdon Chronicle. Building of S.Martin's Church, Oxford, a.d. 1034 33°
§61. Cartulary of S. Frideswide. A vague account of the substitute of
Regulars for Seculars 331
§62. Extract from a 'Chronicon Rofense.' As to Canons instituted at
S. Fridewide's, a.d. 1049 332
§ 63. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1049. Death of Eadnoth, Bishop of
Dorchester and succession of Ulf 332
§ 64. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1049. Bishop Ulf an unfit Bishop . . 332
§ 65. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1053, &c. Wulfwi succeeds Ulf and
dies 1067 ........... 332
§ 66. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1036. Gemot at Oxford, and Harold
chosen King 333
§ 67. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1039. King Harold Harefoot dies at
Oxford 333
§ 68. Canterbury Charter. Messenger from Canterbury visits Harold when
lying ill at Oxford 333
§ 69. Westminster Charter. Incidental mention of Eadward's birth at Islip
near Oxford 333
§ 70. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1065. The great Gemot at Oxford;
Harold agrees to the outlawry of Tostig 334
§ 71. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1065. „ „ 334
§ 72. Florence of Worcester. „ „ . . 334
§ 73. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1065. The march of the rebel mob from
the north 334
Passages quoted in Chapter X. Oxford during the twenty
YEARS AFTER THE NoRMAN CONQUEST.
§ 74. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1066. The march of William to Beorh-
hamstede is met by Archbishop and Earls, &c 335
§ 75. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, A.D. 1066. After Hastings, William is
crowned in London 335
§ 76. Florence of Worcester. William goes to Beorcham .... 335
§ 77. William of Malmesbury. William goes to London .... 336
§ 78. Henry of Huntingdon. William is crowned at Westminster . . 336
xxviii CONTENTS.
PAGE
§ 79. William of Boictiers. William goes to London via Guarcngefort . 336
§ So. William of Jumieges. ,, „ • 337
§ Si. William of Poictiers. After his coronation William goes to Bercingis 337
§ 82. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1067. William first quells the rebellion
at Exeter, then at York 337
• 338
• 338
. 33 :
in the
• 338
■ 339
$83. Florence of Worcester. ,,
§84. William of Mahnesbury. „ u
§85. Roger of Wendover. ,, »
§ 86. Cartulary of Oseney. Robert D'Oilgi's foundation of S. George's
Castle and S. Mary Magdalen Church ....
§ 87. Cartulary of Oseney. Roger of Ivry's gifts to the same
§ 88. Abingdon Abbey Chronicle. Robert D'Oilgi appointed 'Constable'
of Oxford and takes away King's Mead from Abingdon Abbey . 339
§ 89 Abingdon Abbey Chronicle. Robert D'Oilgi restores the churches of
Oxford and builds Hythe Bridge 34°
§ 90. Charter of King William. Removes the See of Dorchester to Lincoln 340
§ 91. Evesham Chronicle. The relics of S. Egwin exhibited at Oxford . 341
Passages quoted in Chapter XL The description of Oxford as
GIVEN IN THE DOMESDAY SURVEY.
§ 92. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a.d. 1085. The making of the Domesday
Survey 341
§ 93. Domesday Survey. The portion relating to the City of Oxford . . 341
§ 94. Domesday Survey. Robert D'Oilgi's lands at Oxford . . -344
§ 95. Charter of King William. The connection between S. Mary of Stowe
and Ensham 344
§ 96. Charter of King William. „ „ „ • 345
§ 97. Charter of Bishop Remigius conferring S. Ebbe's Church, to Ensham . 345
§ 98. Charter of Henry I conferring possessions in Oxford to Ensham . . 345
§ 99. Domesday Survey. The possessions of the Canons of S. Frideswide . 345
§ 100. Abingdon Abbey Chronicle. Houses purchased in Oxford by Abbot
Faritius 34"
§ 1 01. Domesday Survey. Laws promulgated at Oxford .... 346
§ 102. William of Malmesbury. The Story of S. Mildred . . . -347
§ 103. Abingdon Abbey Chronicle. Wrilliam Rufus greets Peter, the Sheriff
of Oxfordshire, and mentions his port-reeve Eadwi . . . 347
CONTENTS. xxix
APPENDIX B.
The Name of Oxford.
PAGE
The two theories as to the origin of the name, i.e. (a) ' The ford of the Oxen,'
(&) 'The ford of the Ouse' 348
The earliest forms of the name, i. e. Oxnaforda, Oxeneforda, Sec, in the Anglo-
Saxon Chronicle 348
The earliest forms on coins 349
The forms adopted by the Chroniclers and the name Oxonia . . . 349
The earliest forms point to the name being ' The ford of the Oxen ' . .350
Considerations as to a ford being set apart for Oxen and a note of landmarks
and places bearing the word Ox 350
The objections to the theory of the ford of the Ouse to be met by analogies 351
The objection of a Celtic affix and Saxon suffix met by examples of Ex-
minster, Axminster, &c 351
The objection of the change of Ouseford or Ousanford into Oxford . .352
The dialectic forms of Ouse, e.g. Usk, Exe, Axe 352
Evidence from the Roman Isca 353
Reference to places with the syllable Ouse 355
The example of Osanig in Archbishop ^Elfric's will, afterwards Oxhey . -355
The example of Osanlea 356
The objection that the Thames at Oxford was never found to bear the
name of Ouse 357
The probabilities of the original names, to be viewed by reflected light . 357
The Roman Tam-esis no doubt the Celtic Tam-ese 357
Ese or Ise a dialectic form of Ouse ; also Oise 358
The direct evidence of the island in the river Thames at Oxford being called
Ouseneye ; original name not Oxeneye 359
Tempsford on the Ouse called Tam-ese-ford, that is the ford over the
Tam-ese 359
The Thame and the Thames 361
The Thame and Isis, as origin of Thamisis, according to Leland, Camden, &c. 36 2
The analogy of the form of Ock river which falls into the Thames at
Abingdon 363
Comparison of Eoccene-ford and Ousanford 364
The summary of the evidence 364
APPENDIX C.
On the Coins supposed to have been struck at Oxford dur ing
King Alfred's Reign.
A particular type of coin supposed to connect King Alfred with Oxford . 366
The late Mr. Green's argument derived from the supposed existence of Oxford
coins with Alfred's name on them 366
The discovery of coins near Sephton in Lancashire in 161 1 . . . -367
xxx CONTEXTS.
PAGE
The ' Oisnafold' coin and the interpretation by Spelman, Walker, Sir Andrewe
Fountaine, Thoresby, and Wise 368
The great discovery of coins at Cuerdale in Lancashire in 1840 . . . 37°
The tvpe with the letters Orsna-forda 37©
The varieties of this type of coin on the Cuerdale series . - . • 37^
The probable date of the deposition of the hoard derived from the dates of
the coins themselves 373
The large number of the ' S. Edmund' coins 373
The rudeness of the workmanship • • -374
Three thousand coins with them apparently collected on the continent . . 375
The probability that the coins were not issued from an authorised mint . 376
The difficulty of accounting for the circumstance of the supposed Oxford
coins being only found on the banks of the Kibble .... 376
A list of the various readings of specimens in the Bodleian, British Museum,
Wadham College, &c -377
The peculiarity of the inscription being always across the coins in three lines 378
The improbability of the name of the mint being on the obverse together
with the name of the King, while the name of the moneyer is on the
reverse 279
The rule that names of places are always abbreviated on early coins points
to the improbability of Orsnaforda being the name of the place of
mint 379
The invariable introduction of the letter R into the name militates against
the letters being intended for Oxford 3Sl
The difficulty of deciding upon what was the type specimen from which the
moneyer or moneyers have diverged 3Sl
The evidence is adduced for the exercise of the reader's judgment . . 382
APPENDIX D.
Brief notes respecting the plates accompanying this volume.
I. The Frontispiece, i.e. the first page of the portion of the Domesday
Survey relating to Oxfordshire 383
Some notes on the MS. of the Domesday Book 383
A list of the Tenentes in Capite as shown on the facsimile . . • 384
II. A plan of the neighbourhood of Oxford chiefly to illustrate Chapter III. 385
The difficulties in tracing the lines of the old Roman Roads . . 385
The use of the map in illustrating other points referred to in the volume 386
III. A plan of Oxford chiefly to illustrate Chapter XI 3§7
The line of the ancient boundary of the city 387
The churches and the parish boundaries 387
APPENDIX E.
Addenda and Corrigenda.
Ingulph made to come up to Oxford (p. 43) 389
Examples of the name Alfgar, from a MS. and from charters given in Ingulph
(P- 97) 39°
CONTENTS. xxxi
PAGE
391
391
392
^Elfred's sovereignty over Mercia (p. 127)
Bishops of Dorchester : Alheard, Ceolwulf, ^Escwin, &c. (p. 138)
Death of Bishop Sideman at Kirtlington (p. 140)
The story of the stolen bridle and the interference of Winsige, Reeve of
Oxford (p. 140) 392
The pilgrimage of the Oxford citizen to the tomb of ^Ethdwold (p. 140) . 393
The Laws promulgated at Woodstock, at Wantage, and at Ensham (p. 153) 394
Death of Eadnoth, Bishop of Dorchester (p. 172) 395
Bishops Ethelric and Wulfwi (p. 172) 395
William of Malmesbury's account of Remigius (p. 2 1 7) . . . . 396
Charter of William Rufus to Ensham respecting their Oxford property (p. 242) 396
The names of the moneyers at Oxford during the reigns of William and
William II. (p. 269) 397
INDEX chiefly of Persons and Places . . . . . . "399
INDEX of Authors and MSS. referred to . . . . . . .413
A Plan of the Neighbourhood of Oxford chiefly to illus-
trate Chapter III At end.
A Plan of Oxford chiefly to illustrate Chapter XI . . „
THE
EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD
CHAPTER I.
Introductory.
To the question 'At what date does the history of Oxford begin?'
more than one answer may be given ; and they will vary according to
the sense in which the term history is used and the method which has
been adopted in investigating it. Many seem unconsciously to accept
certain myths, which although they do not appear to have had
their existence before the close of the fourteenth and beginning of
the fifteenth century, are so intermingled with the real history
in the literature of succeeding centuries that without considerable
care it is impossible to distinguish the two ; while some, although
admitting their mythical character, seem to think that the stories
should be accepted ' generally/ on the ground that so many writers
of note, and learned in their generation, have unequivocally endorsed
them, and that they, therefore, ought not now to be wholly set
aside. Those who adopt such as history would give the name of
Mempric as the founder of Oxford, and the date b.c. 1009 as that of
the foundation of the city : while as to the University some would say
that it depended either upon the date when the Greek philosophers
arrived at Greeklade, or when they were transferred to Oxford; others,
discarding a portion of the myth (and not observing that the whole
hangs together, or falls together), would insist upon Alfred being if
not the restorer, at least the founder of the University, and therefore
that it should be dated to begin from the year 873 or thereabouts.
But others, while throwing aside such fables, would contend that the
History of a place does not begin with its first mention in public
annals. Taking a philosophical view, they would hold that Oxford,
following the natural laws which have governed the growth of most
cities, owes its origin to some original settler or settlers, who have left
B
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
no trace of their name, and that the precise period when this took
place or the race to which these hypothetical settlers belonged are to
be conjectured only by taking a general survey of the datnet, and
bringing to bear upon it what records may ex.st in the early chroni-
cles of the country. This course of argument though m principle
theoretical, still involves several historical considerations and dtffers
altogether from the mythical, which has been before referred to But
from the nature of the evidence no exact date at all would be
^Ss the mythical and the theoretical origin of Oxford there is
the legendary, and with those who accept this as history there is a
date wWch with reason may be insisted on, namely the ^year 7*7 or
thereabouts), at which time there is some evidence for fixing the
foundation of a nunnery upon the spot now occup.ed by Chr st
Church It might further be claimed that the foundation of such an
Sabhshment implies the existence of some • vill/ and t at rom h,
date onwards Oxford had a place in the pages of the real htstory of
'"lasTthere is the truly historical method, in following which not
only my h but also legend are set on one side, and only facts duly
recorded in documents of undoubtedly genuine character are adduced
uTevtdence. The answer which would be given to those who follow
hi method would be that the history of Oxford cannot be traced
"back than ,». ora when King Edward the Elder took posses-
ion of the place. By these it would however be at once conceded
at th e wire habitations here before that date, and that Oxford had
already received a name, the same or similar to that recorded tn the
ch ontle but this concession would not be destructive of the view
that the known date should be assigned as that of the begmnmg of the
being perhaps more attracttve in its character from appearing more
wnderful, has assumed an importance which renders ,t absoh^
impossible to deal with it according to its intrinsic merits. It may be
said to have supplanted the real history of the beginning of Ox ord
and in consequence, although it is felt that the investigate of jhe
trowth of the myth is a waste of time, and that printing an account
o f th con rov er y as to the relative antiquity of the two Universities is
a wa te of space, and the whole business tedious and irritating, still it
Zt:, :thoPught necessary before giving the historic* date touchm
the rise of Oxford to deal with these myths, and point out, as
INTRODUCTORY. 3
may be, their origin, and the part they played in the controversy which
took place in Elizabeth's reign (and was at times continued by writers
down to the eighteenth century if not later) in order to clear the
ground for discussing the evidence we possess bearing upon the real
history of the town of Oxford. So closely however connected with
the myth of Mempric are the myths respecting Greeklade and the
foundation of the University of Oxford before the time of Alfred, that
they cannot be separated, and the restoration by that king of the Uni-
versity and the foundation of University College, as guessed by some,
and the foundation of the University itself by others, follow on so
closely that in taking either a view of the mythical history of Oxford
or of the controversies this latter part cannot be omitted.
It will be found therefore that several pages are devoted to this
question, on the one hand far more than it at all deserves, but on the
other far less than the part it plays in the literature of the subject might
seem to demand.
Next, although it is not supposed that there were any dwellings on
the actual site of Oxford during the time of the Roman invasion or
occupation of Britain, it has been thought well to point out the rela-
tion which that site bore to the historical events which we find
narrated concerning this part of the country; and also its position
in respect to the historical memorials of the neighbourhood, namely,
those which the soil affords, either in the ancient roads which can be
traced, or the camps which can still be seen, or the remains which
are from time to time brought to the surface by excavations.
Next, it has been thought well to continue such remarks during the
times of the Saxon settlement, for though Oxford is not mentioned
by name, nor is there any reason to associate the spot with any event
recorded till 727 when a nunnery was perhaps founded there, still as
there is reason to suppose that it had its beginning in this period
such remarks will not be out of place, but in accordance with the
views of those who hold that only a theoretical origin can reasonably
be assigned to the town, and that the foundation of S. Frideswide's
nunnery only implies its previous existence.
In treating of the foundation of S. Frideswide's it has been thought
necessary to touch upon such details of her life as show the legendary
character of the biographies of the Saint which we possess, and from
them to deduce all that can be reasonably deduced to support the
story of the foundation ; but it is not intended to supply a complete
narrative of her adventures and miracles; such will no doubt be
hereafter written. After this, as we find Oxford named in the legend,
b 2
4 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
though not in direct records, it will be spoken of as having a definite
existence ; and the history of the surrounding district will be briefly
touched upon, reflecting as it does some light, though but little, upon
the probable trials of a border town.
In ,ia we find Oxford named in the pages of the chronicles in
connection with the fortifications erected on all the chief rivers, in
order to afford protection against the ravages of the Danes
When this latter date is reached it will be found that in the succes-
sive chronicles, which if not always absolutely contemporary still
exhibit by their internal evidence that they are copied from authentic
and genuine sources, the name of Oxford frequently appears : not
perhaps so frequently as might have been expected considering
the length of period, nor as we certainly should have wished; sti
sufficiently so to justify an attempt to weave a history which shall
represent something of a view of Oxford as it stood in its relation to
the political events of the kingdom during the century and a half
which preceded the Norman Conquest.
CHAPTER II.
The Mythical Origin of Oxford.
No chronicle properly so called appears to be extant in which the
Chronicler associates King Mempric with Oxford before that of the
Historia Regum Atig/iae, by John Rous1 or Rosse, a chantry priest of
Warwick. He wrote his chronicle at the close of the fifteenth century,
bringing it down to the birth of Prince Arthur, a.d. i486, and in it
he introduces this story.
1 About this time Samuel the servant of God was judge in Judaea; and
King Magdan had two sons ; that is to say Mempricius and Malun.
The younger of the two having been treacherously killed by the elder,
he left the kingdom to the fratricide. He (Mempricius) was a man
full of envy and cruelty, and according to that passage in the second
of Proverbs 2, ' Anger hath no mercy,' so had he none, but he was
against every one and every one was against him. This Mempricius
entered upon his rule as a monarch badly, and he continued his rule
still worse by killing his nobles. At length, in the twentieth year of
his reign, he was surrounded by a large pack of very savage wolves,
and being torn and devoured by them, ended his existence in a
horrible manner. Nothing good is related of him except that he
begot an honest son and heir by name Ebrancus, and built one noble
city which he called from his own name Caer-Memre, but which after-
wards, in course of time, was called Bellisitum, then Caerbossa, at length
Ridohen, and last of all Oxonia, or by the Saxons Oxenfordia, from
a certain egress out of a neighbouring ford ; which name it bears to
the present day. There arose here in after years an universal and noble
seat of learning, derived from the renowned University of Grek-laad.
' It is situated between the rivers Thames and Gharwell which meet
there. This city, just as Jerusalem, has, to all appearance, been
changed ; for as Mount Calvary, when Christ was crucified, was just
outside the walls of the city, and now is contained within the circuit of
the walls ; so also there is now a large level space outside Oxford con-
tiguous to the walls of the town which is called Belmount, and which
means beautiful mount ; and this in a certain way agrees with one of
the older names of the city before named and recited ; that is to say,
Bellisitum; whence many are of opinion that the University from
1 According to Leland John Rous died January 24, 1491.
2 No such passage occurs in the second chapter of Proverbs. The nearest is
chap, xxvii. 4.
6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OX FORK.
Grcklad was transferred to this very Bell* mau or Belkutum before
Ae coming of the Saxons, and while the Britons ruled m the island
the com.n or tn dedicated under the name of
' the samt vt U pace for the creation of graduates, as now
some o he saint, ^ *c P . with[n thc waUs. of this noble
'untrsityTLll toucn'more fully when I come to the times of King
Alfred '■' „ , , ,
No words are needed to point out the absurdities of a history such
as is here recorded ; whether judged by the circumstances ^mselves
"h n taken in connection with what is known of the early history of
hi country from classical writers, or in respect of the improba-
lities which at once suggest themselves of any records havurg
been preserved independent of the material which those writers used.
It may however be useful to attempt to trace the sources of his com-
pilation as far as possible and expose the true character of his work
Lee his story represents fairly the substance of the myth winch has
ound its way into" nearly every work relating to the history of Oxford
And first It will be well to consider the character of the chrome
and how far the chronicler may be trusted. , Although the title of h.
book in which the passage about Oxford Occurs, is ' a instory of the
Kings of England 'Rous begins with Genesis as his 6rst authority
The paragraph at the bottom of the second folio (the first being
2 nPup with his preface), will as clearly as any other • showlttw
ready the author is to take all that comes, and how much or rather
how little of the critical faculty he exhibits in weighing evtdence
before inserting any story into his chronicle.
•Of other cities built before the Deluge, Moses is silent; but the
famous Bernard of Breydenbaeh, Dean and — rlam of the
Cathedral Church of Mayenee, in his Itinerary to *« folyLand
. writes that before Noah's Deluge there were eight noble cities
erected as human safeguards against that deluge which was about to
happen,' &c. &c.s
After various dissertations, consisting partly of extracts derived from
the literature with which he was acquainted, and partly of the expres-
sions of his own fancies, he comes on the seventeenth folio of his
. Joannis Rossi Antiq„arii Warwicensis *f*g^JE?ZS£
xii fo. n a. Hcarne's Edition, Oxon, 1745. P- »; . *or me,f , e ° c.
"ho references lo the pages of Ilcame's printed edition are added, and thc passage
H E££~ZL*m Sill, &c, Mognnt. ,4S6 Other e*™^ >
but it was the first edition which Rous must have used when wnt.ng his chronicle,
which he ends with the very year of its publication.
3 Rous, MS. fo. 2 a, Hearae's ed. p. 3. Appendix A, § -
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF' OXFORD. J
chronicle to the time of Brutus, and here he takes for his authority the
Romance of Geoffrey of Monmouth, compiled in the twelfth century.
This on the one hand he summarises (often inaccurately), on the
other he often interpolates, to all appearance, absolutely out of his
own imagination. It will convey more clearly than any words can con-
vey to the reader an idea of the character of his work in these respects
to give a passage or two from Geoffrey of Monmouth, for the sake of
comparison ; and a portion of the passage whence he has derived his
account of Mempric, which has already been quoted, will serve as well
as any other for this purpose. Geoffrey of Monmouth had written : —
1 Then Samuel the prophet reigned in Judaea, and Silvius Aeneas
was still living. And Homer was esteemed a famous orator and poet.
Maddan, who was now invested with the crown, had by his wife two
sons, Mempric and Malim, and governed the kingdom peaceably and
diligently for forty years. When he died there arose a quarrel between
the said brothers respecting the kingdom, and each one strove to
possess the whole island. [The details of the treachery are then
described, and also the iniquities of Mempric] ....
' At length [Mempric] in the twentieth year of his reign, in order
to engage in hunting, retired from his companions into a certain
valley, where he was surrounded by a number of ravenous wolves and
was devoured in a horrible manner. Then Saul was reigning in Judaea
and Eurysthenes in Lacedaemonia V
It will be seen on comparison how much Rous has expanded the
original material, for no part of the passage which has been previously
quoted from Rous is contained in Geoffrey's Romance excepting that
Ebraucus (which either Rous or the transcriber has turned into
Ebrancus) is named as a good king as well as the builder of York. It
is possible too that Rous did not follow Geoffrey of Monmouth at first
hand, but may have used one of those numerous chronicles, which
are more or less an expansion of Geoffrey's Romance, according
to the fancy or the ability of the chronicler. With regard to his
statement that this Mempric (whoever he was or from whatever source
Geoffrey of Monmouth originally obtained the name) was the founder
of Oxford, it would be quite consistent with the general character of
his work to attribute it to Rous's own invention. He seems, no
doubt with praiseworthy intentions, to think it useful and expedient
and in no way detrimental to history, to associate certain names
with certain cities on etymological or other grounds, following in
1 Geoffrey of Monmouth, lib. ii. cap. 6. There have been several editions of
Geoffrey's British History. The most accessible perhaps is Galfredi Monumeten-
sis Historic Britonum, ed. J. A. Giles, 8vo., London, 1844. The MS. copies are
exceedingly numerous. See Appendix A, § 3.
8 THE KARL) HISTORY OF OXFORD.
this his guide Geoffrey of Monmouth, though the latter seems as
often to invent the name of a person1 to fit the place as to find a place
to fit some given name of a person. For instance, when Geoffrey
of Monmouth writes about the victories of Brennius and Belinus, he
makes out that the latter 'erected a gate of wonderful workman-
ship which from his name the citizens at this time call Belinesgate V
It is not necessary to criticise Geoffrey's so-called history, or to
enquire whether by Brennius he means Brennus, the Gallic general ;
practically all that is to the purpose is to observe how Rous handles
the passage. He takes the substance, but finding that Geoffrey has a
character to whom he has omitted to give a city, he adds 'Brennus
built Bristol/ and then adds parenthetically, as it were, 'the place of
Brend3.'
But such foolish guesses passed for science, and unfortunately
a fiction of one generation passed for history in the next. In one
sense it is more pardonable perhaps that in the case of his own town
Warwick, when he found no notice of it in the early times to which
Geoffrey's Romance relates, and esteeming the antiquity of a place
to be amongst its chief glories, he should attempt to discover a history
for it even at the expense of another place ; still, though he may have
thought it meritorious we can scarcely think it even justifiable that he
should make the gratuitous assertion that the city of Warwick was
also called Caerleon, according to our Gildas4. It is, perhaps,
needless to say that Gildas says nothing to warrant the assertion, that
what is said about Caerleon does apply to Warwick, but the statement
being once made, it has been of course followed by later writers and
relied upon as evidence even by the learned and laborious Dugdale5.
It must be remembered also that Rous did not stand alone ; he
is only an example of others, before and afterwards, whose mistaken
zeal has so much corrupted the early history of this country, that the
facts have been sometimes lost sight of beneath the fables.
' For instance, following in the wake of the story which makes Brutus to found
Britain, he invents (Book II. § l) Kamber to fit Cambria or Wales, and Albanactus
to fit Albania, or Scotland, and Locrinus to fit Lcegria. In the next section he
makes Ilumber to be a king of the Huns for the sake of drowning him in the river
which bears his name. In the next we have mentioned Conneus, who ^ready
received Cornubia, < which was either derived from the Latin Cornu or ^from his
name' In the next we have Estrildis, whose daughter was called Sabren, and
being thrown into the river Severn, it was thence called Sabrina.
Geoftey of Monmouth, lib. iii. § 10. Appendix A, § 4.
■ Rous MS., fol. 13 a, ed. p. 25. Appendix A, § 5.
' Rous MS. fol. 14 a, ed. p. 26. Appendix A, § 6.
» Dugdale's History of Warwickshire, fob, London, 1656, P 260.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 9
Although the examples already given from Rous might be deemed
sufficient to show the worthless character of the chronicle on which we
have to rely as being the first to introduce us to the founder of
Oxford, it will be convenient to give one more, since it plays an
important part in the controversy which was carried on in connection
with the respective antiquity of the two Universities of Oxford and
Cambridge in Queen Elizabeth's reign, and which for certain reasons
will be referred to somewhat fully later on.
Geoffrey of Monmouth l has introduced a story of how a king,
Gurguntius Brabtruc 2 by name, who succeeded Brennius, conquered
Dacia, and on his return home through the Orkney islands, found that
thirty ships filled with men and women which had sailed from Spain
had arrived. Their leader Partholoim informed him that they had been
driven out from their country and that they were Barclenses. He gave
them Ireland, which was then uninhabited, and where they flourished
and which they have occupied, as Geoffrey says, ' to the present day/
Rous takes the substance of the passage, and then, after the state-
ment that Gurguntius gave Ireland to their chief Partholoim (which he
writes Partholaym), he tacks on the story of the foundation of Cambridge
in the following words : —
'And he (i.e. King Gurguncius) retained with him their chiefs
brother, by name Ganteber, the rightful heir to Cantebra, one of the
Spanish cities ; and he gave him together with his daughter in marriage
a tract of land in East Anglia, where as those of Cambridge write, he
built a city upon the river " Cant " about Anno Mundi 4317; and because
he was most erudite he gathered around him learned men and began that
place of study for himself which in our days flourishes with high honour,
and this city from his son Grantinus who made there a bridge was
called Caergrant or, according to others Grauntcestre, and is now
called Cambryge, and is the capital of the surrounding country3/
Here we find introduced into his chronicle what may be called the
Cambridge myth, which was relied upon by the disputant on one side
in the controversy above referred to. It will be found that the Oxford
and Cambridge myths appear to run in many respects pari passu. The
evidence, however, points to Rous being more responsible for assigning
1 Geoffrey of Monmouth, lib. Hi. § 12.
2 Here is a remarkable instance of Geoffrey's invention of names. It is impos-
sible to look through his long lists (and he is fond of making such, e. g. he gives
the names of the twenty sons and of the thirty daughters of King Ebrancus)
without seeing that they are inventions mainly produced by perversions of known
names. From whatever source he obtained the Gurguntius — the Brabtruc is simply
Curtbarb or Shortbeard, some nickname spelt backwards.
3 Rous MS., fol. 13 b, ed. p. 25. See Appendix A, § 7.
10 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Oxford to Mempric than for assigning Cambridge to the mythical
Cantaber, which looks like a local production, Rous being only the
transcriber, since he particularly notes « ut scribunt Cantabngienses.
" As to Oxford, however, the founding of the City by Mempric does
not involve the founding of the University at this date. The latter is
said to have been transplanted hither from « Greklade ' in after years,
and this part of the story which Rous has woven into his own occurs
perhaps in the earliest form in a treatise commonly called the Oxford
Historiola. It will be best first of all to give this, or at least so much of
it as affects the present question, and then afterwards to say some-
thing about its age. It runs :—
' The Transference of the University from place to place.
'By the concurrent testimony of several chronicles, many places
throughout different parts of the world are said at various times to
have gained repute in the promotion of the study of the various
sciences. But the University of Oxford is found to be earlier as to
foundation, more general in the number of sciences tan ft, firmer m he
profession of Catholic Truth, and more distinguished for the multitude
of its privileges, than all other Studia now existing amongst the Latins.
Very ancient British Histories imply the priority of its foundation for
it is related that amongst the warlike Trojans, when with their leader
Brutus they triumphantly seized upon the island, then called Albion,
next Britain, and lastly England, certain Philosophers came and chose
a suitable place of habitation in this island, on which the Philosophers
who had been Greek bestowed a name which they have left behind
them as a record of their presence, and which exists to the present day,
that is to say Grekelade. . ,
'Not far from this it is known that the town of Oxford is situated,
which because of the pleasantness of the rivers, meadows and woods
adjoining it, antiquity formerly named Bellesitum ; afterwards the
Saxon people named it Oxford from a certain neighbouring ford so
called, and selected it as a place of study V
This Historiola is found at the commencement of three different books
preserved in the Archives of the University. The earliest is the
'Chancellor or Commissary's Book.' This appears to have been
written in the time of Edward III, and to all appearance towards the
« From the Chancellor's Book, etc., in Oxford, compared with a copy in the
Cottonian Library. Printed in Munimenta Acadonica, ed Anstey, Rolls Series,
vol Up. 367. The paragraph ends with a rhetorical flourish scarcely translateable,
but the mean inrr of which is perhaps as follows:—
The «c«sto profusion indeed of the scienees there taught ,s the more clear y
seen, in proportion as in other Universities {.Studia) attentton .s so exclusively
i Ln to one or more sciences that either several, or at least some one seems to be
on. toed ; at Oxford, on the other hand, each one is so taught that a science whtch
is there rejected may be regarded as undeserving of the name. Appendix A, § b.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. n
end rather than the beginning of the reign. A charter of the 49th
of Edward III [1375] seems to belong to the same writing as the
original book, but additions of various kinds bring the contents down
to a charter of Inspeximus of Queen Elizabeth, dated 1575, about which
time the book was bound up in the condition in which it is now left.
The two other books preserved in the Oxford Archives are of a still
later date, being copies of the former, and they throw therefore no
light upon the matter. The Cottonian Manuscript — which is in a
good clear hand, and to all appearance the same throughout — is a
copy made from the Oxford book, probably for the private use of the
Chancellor, and soon after 1411, since that appears to be the date,
so far as has been observed, of the most recent documents included.
The title given is ' Slatuia Privilegia et Consuetudines Universitatis
Oxoniensis, una cum Literis et Chartis Regiis! Bound up with it at
the end is a finely written copy of the Postils of Wycliffe, but there
appears no reason why the two should have been originally associated
together, nor are they written by the same hand.
This Historiola probably contains the earliest form of that portion
of the myth which relates to the Greek Philosophers accompanying
Brutus and the Trojans, and fixing on Greek-lade as the place of
residence, though no doubt previous to this the sound of the name
Cricklade had suggested a derivation which commended itself to the
minds of greek scholars, and so readily laid the foundation of this
ridiculous myth.
It may seem hardly worth bestowing any serious consideration on so
palpable an etymological fancy, but the constant repetition has perhaps
given it a position which involves a word or two as to the name of the
place. The name occurs in the A.S. Chronicles under the years 905
and 1016, in connection with Danish incursions. It is variously spelt
according to the various editions Crecca-gelade, Crac-gelade, Creace-gelade,
Creocc-gelade, Cre-gelade, Cric-gelade, Craeci-lade, Creca-lade. It also
occurs in a copy of a will, preserved in the Hyde Abbey Chronicle,
made by a certain Ethelmar, an ealdorman, who bequeathed property
to the New Minster or Winchester, and to other places. He gives,
amongst many other bequests, two pounds to Malmesbury, one pound
to Bath, and one pound to Crac-gelade. The writer has given a Latin
translation of the will, and a version in the English of the period at
which he wrote : in the former it is ' unam libram ecclesiae x de Crike-
1 This word ' ecclesia ' is an interpolation, as the name appears in common with
several others to which the word ' monasterium ' is applied. There was probably
some college of priests attached to the church here, but it had nothing to do with
the Priory, which was founded about n 00.
la THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
fade,' in the latter ' on pund in to Crykelade.' The will is not dated,
but the probabilities are it is that of an ealdorman whose death we
find recorded in the Chronicles under the year 982 l.
The next references we have to the spelling are in the Domesday
Survey, where it is spelt Criche-lade throughout several examples. It
would appear that the Burgesses of Cricklade for some reason paid
rent to many different manors. But the prefix to the geladc or lade
(i. e. a way or channel as regards water, a lode as regards mineral
veins) is simply creeca2, a creek, i. e. a bay, and probably used as a
wharf for boats loading and unloading. It was evidently a town
of some importance during the tenth century, but no record whatever,
directly or indirectly, refers to any circumstances which would have
suggested the story otherwise than the name.
It is, however, true that the word Greek is sometimes written in
Saxon creac, and Creca-rice appears to be used for the kingdom of the
Greeks, yet the origin of the conceit has been, no doubt, from the
form of Cricfce, i. e. Crick-lade, which in rapid pronunciation sounds
like ' Greek! That was probably the source of the whole story about
the Philosophers coming to Greeklade at some unknown period before
Britain was visited by Julius Caesar. There can be little reason to
doubt that the story in the Historiola formed the groundwork of Rous'
addition to Geoffrey of Monmouth's fiction about Gurguntius, since
Rous, as is shown by incidental remarks in his ' History,' was once a
scholar in Oxford :i, and was curious in such matters.
1 The words of the Liber de Hyda, Rolls Series, London, 1866, p. 254, are:
'This same year died two ealdormen, Aethelmar in Hampshire and Eadwin in
Sussex, and Aethelmar's body lies at Winchester, for the will contains these words,
"I give first of all to God for my soul, to the new monastery at Winchester where
it is my will that I shall rest, a hundred mancuses of gold." The will from other
evidence must be of about the date, and it is not probable that there were two
ealdormen of Wcssex of about the same time of the name of Aethelmar and both
buried at Winchester.'
2 So Creccanforda — now Crayford in Kent.
3 Rous, in his Historia, Hearne's ed. p. 5, refers to John Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester,
who, he says, was ' a co-scholar ' of his in the University of Oxford. Very frequently
elsewhere throughout his Historia he refers to the time when he was at Oxford,
sometimes by implication, sometimes directly, e.g. 'and ordered it to be called the
" Little Hall of the University," and thus it was so called in my days (p. 77).
' As I saw, in a certain chronicle at Oseney near Oxford, while I was a scholar
there' (p. 100). 'And I well recollect while I was at the schools at Oxford, King
Henry VI, when he came to these parts, was wont to take up his abode with the
said Friars' (p. 192). 'And at the time when I was there at the schools a part of
the marble cross fell' (p. 202). 'This ordinance I saw when I was a boy in
Oxford, but as I was then only of youthful age {minoris actatis), I have not
retained so long in my memory what 1 saw' (p. 208).
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 13
But we have not accounted for all his story : there is still the fiction of
the University, like Jerusalem, having been once outside the walls on
the north of Oxford, and for the probable source of this we must look
to another MS. earlier than Rous's time, and possibly even anterior to
the addition of the Historiola to the Oxford Registers. It is from
the Hyde Abbey Chronicle, and runs as follows : —
' Which University of Oxford was once without the North gate of
that city, and the church of St. Giles was the chief church of all the
clerks (clerus) outside the said gate. But now it is within the walls
of the city of Oxford and the church of St. Mary is the principal church
of the clerks within the said city. And this transference took place in
the 28th year of the reign of King Edward the third after the conquest,
in the year of our Lord, one thousand three hundred and fifty-four.
And the reason of this transference was as follows * : '
The paragraph above quoted follows on immediately after one attri-
buting the beginning of the University of Oxford to a.d. 886, i. e. the
early years of the reign of King Alfred, and has therefore nothing to
do with the story of the Greek philosophers migrating from Greek-
lade. Rous, however, has ignored this, and ingeniously combined
the two, and herein we seem to obtain a glimpse at the manner of the
growth of the myth into the more complete form in which we find
it in his pages.
As to the story, however, which the Hyde Abbey Chronicler has
given us, it is of no value in respect to the early history of Oxford,
since it is too slight to enable us to judge of the circumstances
which prompted the insertion of the paragraph ; and the reason
given by the writer for the transference of the University, namely, that
it was in consequence of the fight between the clerks and the
citizens, which took place on S. Scholastica's day, a.d. 1354, simply
shows that he has heard some wonderful story, and confused it : we
have a very full account of this riot (accompanied as it was by much
bloodshed), based on evidence of a most trustworthy kind, namely
depositions by the several authorities ; and there is nothing in the
account to justify the story of any transference of the University from
the north to within the city gates.
The particular reference also to the twenty-eighth year of King
Edward III after the Conquest is proof that it belongs to a date late
in the century, for the style is scarcely that which the chronicler would
have adopted of a reigning monarch ; and further, the statement, so
contrary to well-known fact, that the University did not find its way
1 Liber Monasterii de Hyda. Rolls Series, London, 1866, p. 41 . App. A, § 9.
i4 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
within the walls of Oxford till the year 1354, and that then S. Mary's
church, as is implied, for the first time became the University
church, points to some date for the story when the event referred to
was beyond the remembrance of living persons1.
In analysing, however, the mythical story as imported into the
dated chronicle of Rous, and in attempting to discover the source of
the several portions, we meet with a curious form of the Cricklade
conceit which must be quoted. It is just possible that it is of a date as
early as, if not earlier than, the reference to the place in the Historiola,
added to the Chancellor's books of the University, and already given.
The passage occurs in a chronicle to which several dates, as well
as titles, have been assigned, but it is usually known as the Chronicon
Jornallense (or Jorvallense), i. e. of Jervaulx, a monastery in Yorkshire,
founded in 11 56; and the authorship is usually attributed to John
Brompton, one of the abbots. It runs as follows : —
' Whence about the same time [i. e. temp. King Alfred] according to
the opinion of some, and the common saying of both ancient and
modern writers, it is thought that a University [studiuni] was founded
at Grant-chester near Cambridge by the venerable Bede : which can
very readily be believed, both for and from the fact that afterwards in
the time of Charles the Great, King of France, one reads that a seat
of learning was transferred from Rome to Paris by one Alquin, an
Englishman, a disciple of Bede, exercised in all learning as will hereafter
be told more fully.
'Also it has been already recorded that Erpwald, King of East
Anglia [a.d. 624-29] the son of King Redwald, before he had been
made king, and while he was an exile in Gaul, instituted, with the help
of S. Felix the Bishop, schools for boys, such as he had seen there.
But according to some, still before these times there were two seats
of learning in England, one for Latin and the other for Greek, of which
the Greeks placed one at Greglade, which is now called Kirkelade, and
there for a time taught the Greek tongue. The other, however, the
Latins placed at Latinelade which is now called Lechelade near Oxford,
teaching there the Latin tongue V
1 It may be added that in one place the author quotes the Polychronicon of
Ralph Higden, which was not completed till 1357; and this again tends to
throw the MS. towards the end of the century. The handwriting, too, is of late
character, so much so that the Chronicle might even have been written early in
the following century.
2 Chronicon [Joannis Brompton] abbatis Jornalcnsis sub anno DCCCLXXXVI.
Cottonian MS. Tiberius, c. xiii. folio 36 b. Printed in Twisdcn's Decern Scriptores,
London, 1652, col. 814. The earliest MS. of this Chronicle extant, i. e. that in the
Cottonian collection, is written to all appearance in a rather late fifteenth century
hand, and being one of those which suffered in the fire, no traces are left of any
reference to the history of the MS., by whom copied, or any date by which
to ascribe it to any particular monastery. It is probably not a contemporary
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 15
It is a misfortune that more has not been discovered to fix the
exact date of this chronicle, as the passage contains not only the
Greeklade conceit, but its etymological companion1. At the same
time it includes an early mention (if not the earliest found in any
chronicle) of the story of Bishop Felix, which belongs to the Cambridge
myth, and which may be said to occupy the same place in the
Cambridge series as the invention concerning King Alfred occupies in
the Oxford series.
It is however generally considered to be a chronicle compiled in the
time of Edward III 2. It contains matter which certainly shows it to
have been written not earlier than that reign, but it does not appear to
be referred to by other chroniclers till we reach Leland in Henry VIII's
reign. But if it is correctly ascribed to Abbot Brompton, we are met
by this difficulty. In the list of the abbots of Jervaulx, as compiled
by Dugdale, two John Bromptons are given, viz. one who was
appointed in a.d. 1193, the other elected in 1436 3. The first of these
dates is out of the question 4; and though nothing has been observed
which directly militates against the chronicle being of the time of the
second abbot of the name of Brompton, on the whole it is probably
earlier, and, as Twisden suggests, it is so called not necessarily from
Abbot Brompton having written it, but from his name having ap-
peared in connection with it. As the Greeklade conceit was probably
the earlier of the two, and gave rise to that of Latinlade, it would have
been interesting to have traced how far back the invention could be
MS., i. e. one written under the author's supervision. The reason why it is
ascribed to John Brompton is not clear. It is so by Twisden, and the Cottonian
MS. is avowedly the MS. which Twisden used in transcribing the work for his
Decern Scriptores, yet on the face of the MS. itself there is no reason, so far as
has been observed, for ascribing it to that author. Appendix A, § 10.
1 There is no instance, so far as has been observed, of this name occurring
before the Domesday Survey, and in this it is spelt Lecelade. But as it is situated
close by the spot where the river Leach joins the Thames, there can be no difficulty
as to the name, nor any reason to suppose that there was any form which more
nearly approached the word ' Latin ' than that in which it appears now. The
reason of the river being called the Leach (on which two villages of the name
of Leach are situated) is open to discussion ; but the word Lech, it may be
observed, occurs in the names of other places, e. g. Leckhampton near Cheltenham,
and Leckhampstead in Berkshire.
2 It is so by Twisden in his prefatory remarks, and others have followed him.
3 Dugdale, new ed., vol. v. p. 567. The only authority he gives for 1193 is
Browne Willis. For 1436 the reference is to a series of extracts from the York
Registers made in 1702, and in the Harleian Collection. (MS. 6972, fol. 29.)
* Only one writer has been observed to attribute it to this date, and that is the
author of the Life of S. Frideswide in the Acta Sanctorum, October, vol. viii.
P- 534-
!6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
carried. No other writer as early as the fourteenth century seems to
have heard of it.
The above passages, it is believed, represent the only authorities for
the myth of the Mempric origin of the City or of the Greek origin of the
University before the close of the fifteenth century, when, as has been
seen, they have been gathered up by Rous into one connected story.
In the controversy, of which an account will be given, it is asserted
that Leland in the sixteenth century supported the story; but the refer-
ence is very unsatisfactory, for the reason that in all his books which
have been printed there is nothing of the kind, although there would
have been several opportunities for him to introduce the story if he had
believed it ; but it would appear from passages in his Collectanea and in
the Notes to his Cygnea Cantio that he thought Alfred to have been the
founder of the University of Oxford. The passage, however, the con-
troversialists adduce, is supposed to be a MS. marginal note which
Leland made on a copy of Polydore Virgil to this effect :—
• He affirms that he had read in some writers of British History of
great antiquity, that in the times of the Britons both Greek and Latin
"schools flourished « ad vadum Isidis V and that they were destroyed
during the wars and were not restored till the time of Alfred .
But Bryan Twyne is supposed to quote the same passage to prove
that Leland held this view, for he says it is from a marginal note to
Polydore Virgil; yet on comparison his transcript of the note turns
out to be very different, and runs thus :—
< There were in the times of the Britons, Greek and Latin schools
"ad ripas hidis" of which the names in a corrupt way remain to this
day ; which the Preceptors of the place attracted by the pleasantness
of the place transferred it to Caleva, where the pious Alfred restored
learning to its pristine seat V
» This is a term for Oxford which Leland frequently uses, meaning thereby
4 Ouse-ford.'
2 Assertio Antiquitatis Oxon., Hearne s ed. p. 279.
3 Bryan Twyne Antiq. Oxon. Apologia, Oxoniae, 1608, p. 114. By Caleva here
is meant Oxford; but Leland, in his Commentary on the Cygnea Canto, says very
di uncty ' Mea plane opinio semper sit, atque adeo nunc est, Calevam earn fmsse
u bem quae nunc Walengaforde dicitur.' This seems rather to conflict ^
passage being Iceland's; but Bryan Twyne gives another passage which he states
Leland wrote": 'The ancient Britons had two schools flourishing in rhetoric and in
all kinds of learning, of which one was called Greeke-lade from teaching the
Greek 1 nguage, and" the other Latinelade from teaching the Latin, but now
rnrruntlv tteir names are Crekelade and Lechelade.' The only reference to the
^are is 'Haec Telandus, apud Balcum, in Vita Regis Alfred! Magni.' It is
Cught well to give all these "passages in the Appendix, as quoted, though their
source has not been traced. Appendix A, § 1 1.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. ij
As neither of the writers say where the copy of Polydore Virgil
was preserved, it is impossible to decide which is the right extract, or
whether it fulfils the purpose of its quotation. Leland may well have
seen Brompton's Chronicle, but he would not speak of it as a British
author ' mirae antiquitatis!
There are, however, besides these, other etymological myths of less
importance, but of which it is more difficult to discover the exact
authority or the way in which they came into existence.
The Bellesitum is one of these ; it is obviously a latinization of the
French name of Beaumont — a name probably given to the site at the
time Henry I built his palace there. The numerous Beaumonts in
France attest the French origin of such a name, while there are several
to be noted in England ; but whether he called it after any Beaumont
where he had resided when in Normandy, or from the pleasant appearance
of the rising ground, cannot, of course, be decided. When the country
was open, and before the houses were built, the slope towards St. Giles'
would have had a ' pleasant aspect ' from the western side of Oxford,
and also from the eastern along the banks of the Cherwell. The name
of Bellesitum1, however, so far as has been observed, was not applied
to Oxford by any writer till Rous, and the idea no doubt implied
would be that if Oxford had a Latin name, that name would have been
given by the Romans, and that would make it a Roman city. At the
same time, Rous might have heard the King's palace spoken of as
1 Bellesitum ' by the Carmelite friars, to whom Edward II had granted
the royal palace and its appurtenances.
The Caer-bossa and Ridohen (or Rhyd-ychen) myth is clearly
to be traced to Geoffrey's Romance, who has applied one of his
fanciful names to Oxford, though Rous has the credit, such as it is,
of first introducing the fancy into a chronicle. Geoffrey's story is
supposed to take place in the sixth century, that is, if any date can be
ascribed at all to King Arthur, and he narrates that after this King
had refused to pay tribute to the Romans, he assembled an army from
Iceland, Ireland, Gothland, the Orkneys, and Denmark ; then had gone
over to Gaul — to the mouth of the river Barba (wherever that is),
and then, to quote Geoffrey : —
{ When all the forces, which Arthur anticipated, had assembled, he
went thence to Augustodunum, where he thought that their General
1 It is, however, a common form of latizination : e. g. of the various abbeys in
France bearing the name of Beaupre, the" name is written in the charters Belli-
pratum. So our Beaumaris is written in mediaeval Latin Bello-mariscus, and Beaulieu
in Hampshire De Belloloco, just as Rewley, established beneath the slopes of
Beaumont in the thirteenth century, is in the charters called De Regali-loco.
C
,K THl BAKLV HISTORY Of OXFORD.
and try which of them had the most r.ghtm Gaul.
A UtUe later on, Guerin of Chartres exhibits a signal act of
braVe^ Devadohoum therefore was envious that the «*£*£
gave proof of so -^^ ^JKB ^
S Cnrrhl IS."' of, his horse, so that he ecu*
LncmsTfenu.-allthecc fo ^ ^^ the
to known history. This libenus Parthians of the Medes,
selected out of his Eutrop.us. be a
The name of Devadoboum, applied to 15oso, is aann
-Sir-*— --2«^:— i-sjri
„^ After mentioning that there were t\\ o nuncireu pu i
Lndon, YorU, "-*™£F5 'iE£E U*'
SK'STi^ Pledge of Welsh, and imagining that
. Geoffrey of Monmouth h...x.ca,^ ^f^L' 'three cities obtained
2 Geoffrey of Monmouth, lib. ix. cap. *-.
fro,r , the list of Bishop, at the Conned of Aries, A*. ».+
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 19
a place belonging to Arthur ought to have a Welsh name, and fancying
that the origin of the name of Oxford1 was the ford of Oxon 2, inserts,
as has been seen, both forms, Ridocen and Oxnefordia.
Again, later on, when Lucius Tiberius is made to go to a certain
Lengria, Geoffrey again refers to Boso 'de Ridichen quae lingua
Saxonum Oxineford nuncupaiur 3 ' ; and when the story is taken up by
the sixteenth and seventeenth century writers, they imply that there is
a close connection between the name Boso4" and the Ox in Oxford.
This may be so, but then it only belongs to Geoffrey's ingenuity, and
scarcely authorises the name of Caer-Rossa, which already, before
they wrote, Rous had given to it.
Elsewhere Geoffrey refers directly to Oxford, i.e. in the well-known
prophecy of Merlin, and this has been seized upon also as evidence of
the antiquity of the place, not only on the grounds of the early date of
Merlin, but on the ground of his veracity. In this prophecy we find
that after the wild boar of Totness shall oppress the people
* Gloucester shall send forth a lion which in several battles shall
interfere with his cruelty ... A bull shall enter the lists, and shall
strike the lion with his right paw. He shall drive him through the
bye-ways (di-versoria) of the kingdom, but he shall break his horns
against the walls of Oxford5.'
Geoffrey's Romance is copied by several later writers6, who in their
turn are referred to as authorities for the British name of Oxford, and
therefore as proving it to exist in British times. But it is certain no
trace of these fanciful names can be carried back further than the fiction
of Geoffrey of Monmouth. Other myths incidentally have grown up by
1 See, on the origin of the Name of Oxford, Appendix B.
2 In the same, list, fancying that the old Glevum (or Gleaw) had to do with
Claudius, he manufactures Claudiocestra.
3 Geoffrey of Monmouth, lib. x. cap. 6. Most MSS., as well as that of writers
who copy Geoffrey, have Richiden, but no doubt erroneously.
* A similar name however occurs, possibly known to Geoffrey, viz. Bosa, a
Bishop of the Deiri in 678, found in Beda and the Chronicle. Possibly also Bosa
of Selsea, whence Bosan-ham (Bosham, Sussex).
5 Geoffrey of Monmouth, lib. vii. cap, 4. Diversoria, according to Ducange,
would mean ' inns.' The Oxonia is in some MSS. Exonia. Appendix A 1.
6 One of those frequently quoted in the controversy is the Eulogium Histo-
riarum, a chronicle extending to 1366. There is, however, a curious reference to
Merlin's prophecy by a writer who flourished somewhat less than a century after
Geoffrey of Monmouth, namely Alexander Neckam, Abbot of Cirencester, who
died in 1 21 7. In his philosophical treatise, Zte naturd rerum, he has the fol-
lowing : ' Civilis juris peritiam vendicat sibi Italia : sed coelestis scriptura et
liberales artes civitatem Parisiensem caeteris praeferendam esse conveniunt. Juxta
vaticinium etiam Merlini, viguit ad Vada Bourn sapientia tempore suo, ad Hiber-
niae partes transitura.' Neckam, De naturd rerum, Rolls Series, London, 863,
p. 311.
C 2
20 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
hlCr liters, notably by Heame, but what has been narrated completes
Z .valence of the earlier authorities on which the two champions »
the time of Elizabeth had to rely. ,
We now come to the controversy respecting the nval claims of
either of the two Universities to be the most ancient, wh.ch arose
during Queen Elizabeth's reign. The two disputants were respectively
o CaL' of Cambridge, and Thomas Caius'of Oxford, at leas ,
uch ire their Latinized names, their rea. names being Key or Keys.
It is not probable that there was any family relationship between them,
n it seL to be purely an accident that these disputants, represents
respectively the Universities of Oxford and Cambndge, should bear
h same name. But beyond the similarity of the authors' names the
t Zt the books were published anonymously and very ^gularly
tends to confuse the reader, in attempting to follow them, so tl a tit
may perhaps be as well to give first of all some account of the
bibliography of the controversy.
The- first book which appeared in print had the following title :-
■ De antique Cantabrigiensis academiae libri duo. In quonm secundo
'° I Zl ZonnT academe ab Oxoniensi quodam, annU jamelapus
Henricutn Bynneman.
, John Cains (spelt in one instance i^«^-* » ~£
4 Md ^ei^rD^TS^a^rWa^ of Gonvhte and
24th, 1559. being then Doctor hs ^ fourt(.en days
Cains College, "hf.f" * ^AO ^ * had his tomb constrnc.ed beneath
• On the 2nd. 3rd, and 4th ot July, *•"• '«*• . northsideof the high altar
the Tabernacle of the ^TT^^IgS and be"" oppressed by age and
,„ his college chapel, awaiting the will o God, and g n
sickness.' <On his »-» J the ^^^^^ £. From
''"""' 7T Ho'Tleame W «1 e Rev.' Thomas Baker in .729. who took them from
SMSISS^I- «-«r^£ "-snb'ncc from Wood,
• Thomas Caius. The following notes are »akeu *
^M«« 0*«.: Thomas Key -.^^ f fJo.Uh ue& m ly ^
tions appear ,0 have been living in L colnsh re He 7 ^^ ^^
University College, but thee, no £•*£*£ *j of thc Univcrsi,y I,
of All Souls College. In 1 534 ae wa n am, (, ved of hls
appears, however, that tow«d. gc dw. * ^^ t0 do wilh lhe charge,
office in 1552 (though poffiiDly ms 1 g -bendary of Sarom). In 1563
since on the accession ofEtobeth *£J£*£™£ & about the middle of
5 ^^h^uJfi^S5^M& C». He was buried under the
^lof tl ' orth a.lc^f S, betcrVin-thc-Kas, but without an cp.taph.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. %v
The object which John Caius had in signing himself Londinensis
was to appear in the character of a fair and unbiassed judge in the
dispute, and so to conceal, as far as the title-page would enable him
to do, his partisanship in favour of Cambridge. With every reason
to believe that he supplied the arguments, which, as will be seen,
formed the basis of the controversy, knowing too that he was head of
one of the Cambridge colleges, it is difficult to reconcile with literary
honesty the paragraph in which he speaks of his being uninfluenced
by any favouritism. In it he speaks of himself as a London man,
and so located midway between the two, and disposed with equal
favour towards each, having been absent from the Universities for
thirty years, and that he trusts by his intervention as a common friend
to restore an amicable peace between the two disputants 1.
This edition, as to size, was printed in i6mo, and at the end he
added the short treatise of the Oxford writer. The manuscript of
this he appears to have come by not very fairly, and he evidently
printed it without the writer's sanction, and probably without even his
knowledge. He gives the title to this part of the work more fully
than expressed in the general title to the whole : —
' Assertio Antiquitatis Oxoniensis Academiae^ ineerto authore ejusdem
Gymnasii. Ad illustriss. Reginam Anno 1566. Cum fragmento Oxoni-
ensis Historiolae. Additis castigationibus authoris marginalibus ad aste-
riscum positis. Inter quas libri titulus est, qui ante castigationem (quam
editionem secundam diciamus) nullus erat. Omnia prout ab ipsis authoris
exemplaribus accepimus, bona fide commissa for mulls'1.
* Excusum Londini Anno Domini 1568, Mense August 0. Per Henri cum
Bynneman.'
Some six years later, after the author's death, which took place in
1573, another edition was printed by Day, who was the printer patron-
1 Joannis Caii De Antiquitate Cantab., Hearne's ed., p. 5. The paragraph was
allowed to stand in the 4to edition which his friends reprinted in 1574; to tne
title-page of which, however, as will be noticed, they affixed his own name. It
should be noted that it is thought to be more convenient to give the references
to the pages of Hearne's reprint in 1730 than to either of the two original editions
of the treatise, as they are somewhat scarce, while Hearne's is tolerably accessible.
Besides, for the third treatise, the Animadversiones, we are dependent wholly for
a printed copy upon Hearne's edition. Appendix A, § 13.
2 The title thus affixed by his adversary would give the impression that the
book had been already published, and that the marginal notes were of great
importance. They appear, however, to be almost entirely necessary corrections of
a transcript. Thomas Caius states in the beginning of his Animadversiones that
he wrote off the Assertio within a week after he first heard of the Cambridge
oration before Queen Elizabeth, and that the MS. was not prepared for the press.
The conduct of John Caius in printing it under these circumstances seems to be
as unjustifiable as his pretence of being an unbiassed judge.
22
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
ised by Archbishop Parker, and who at the same time held a licence
from the crown for printing Latin books. This reprint was in small
4to, and was issued at the Archbishop's instigation, and partly at the
Archbishop's expense \
To this edition his friends added his real name. The title of this
second edition was similar to that of the first, except that after the
words Libri duo, in the first line, was added :—
1 Aucti ab ipso Authore plurimum?
And in the third line, instead of Londincmi authore : —
' Joanne Caio Anglo Authore:
In the next line, 'jam elapsis duobus ' is changed to 'jam elapsis ali-
quot: and the name Elizabeth is inserted after Reginam, while the
imprint stands as follows :—
'Londini in aedibus Johannis Daii, An. Dom. 1574. Gum Gratia
et Privilegio Regiae Maiestatis.'
The Asserlio Anliquitatis Oxomensis was again reprinted verbatim
as before with a separate title-page, but after the words Anno 1566
there was added :— t
< Jam nuper ad verbum cum priore edita. Cum Jragmento, &*c. [as
before].
'Londini in aedibus Joannis Daii, An. Dom. 1574. Cum Gratia et
Privelegio Regiae Maiestatis^
This new edition was printed, as regards the first part, from a
revised copy which the author left behind him, and though here
and there several passages were added for the sake of greater
effect, and the phraseology here and there improved, no new facts
seen/ to have been adduced, or new arguments brought forward, of
any importance2.
At the end of the quarto edition a third treatise was printed, found
amongst the papers of John Caius, and which was supposed to be
a kind of summing up of the whole question, and written from a
1 The following extract from a letter should be added < as authority ' for this
statement : ' His book in 4to., as you observe, was a posthumous work, but it was
eft in very safe and careful hands, viz. Archbishop Parker's, who bore part of the
expense of the edition, as I find in some MSS. notes of his son, Sir John Parker.
'A note by Rev. Thomas Baker' sent to Hearne, Oct. 26th, 1729. Can Vindiciae ;
He2aTnheS elilor of ftis edition of i574 has printed on the back of the title the
following, and it is not at all improbable that it is from the pen of Archbishop
Parker himself: < Non tarn solicitus fuit Caius noster cum adversano suo de
utriusque academiae antiquitate in hoc opere contendere, quam quae ex varus
antiquis monumentis de statu, privilegiis, dignitate ac praerogativa Cantabr.giae
ipse collegisset edere ac in lucem proferre. In quo cum maxime elaborasse facile
erit sano ac prudenti lectori deprehendere.'
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 23
historical rather than a controversial point of view. It goes over much
the same ground as his other work, and is of no value whatever as
regards any argument. The title is : —
* Historia Cantabrigiensis Academiae ab urbe conditae — Authore Jo-
hanni Caio Anglo.
* Londini in aedibus Johannis Daii, An. Dom. 1574. Cum Gratia et
Privilegio Regiae Maiestatis.'
Besides the above named, more than a century afterwards, it was
found that the Oxford champion had left behind him, first of all,
an annotated copy of the book of John Caius, De Antiqaitate Canta-
brigiensis Academiae, pointing out his fallacies, and, further, a distinct
MS. work which Hearne entitles : —
' Thomae Can, Collegii Uni'versitatis regnante El'rzabethae Magistri, Vin-
diclae Antiquitatis academiae Oxoniensis contra Joannem Caium Can'ta-
brigiensem. In lucem ex autographo emisit Thos. Hearnius.
'Oxonii, E. Theatro Sheldoniano, mdccxxx.'
It would seem from the account which Hearne gives of this MS.
that Thomas Caius, soon after the first edition of his book had
appeared, surreptitiously printed by his adversary, determined to reprint
himself the two books of John Caius, De Aniiquitate Cantabrigiensis
Academiae, and to add his own strictures upon the statements made in
them on the margin ; further, to add his own original Assertio Antiqui-
tatis Oxoniensis Academiae', and, lastly, to subjoin certain Animad-
versions at the end. He had, however, scarcely prepared them for the
press, when, in 1572, he died. The original MS. was retained in
private hands, and while the work of John Caius, immediately after his
death, had found friends at Cambridge to support the reprinting of it
in a handsome form (i.e. in 1574), as has been shown, no friends in
Oxford came forward to support even the printing of the MS. which
Thomas Caius had left behind him. So the latter MS. remained
unpublished, passing from one person to another till it came into the
hands of Archbishop Usher, thence to his nephew, James Tyrrell Usher,
thence by bequest to some one whose name Hearne does not mention,
but refers to him only as quidam vir litteratus, who gave it into his
hands on the condition that he should print it, and so it was not till
a.d. 1730 that, under the general title of Vindiciae Antiquitatis Aca-
demiae Oxoniensis, it saw the light 1.
1 Hearne, as is his wont, has printed many other things with it, some of which
have nothing to do with the question, so that the De Antiquitate Cantabrigiae, the
Assertio Oxoniensis, and the Animadversiones only form a portion of the two
volumes. The other book of John Caius, the Historia Cantabrigiensis, was not
thought worth reprinting by him.
24 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
We now come to the actual controversy, and it will be best on this
to let John Caius tell the story himself. He writes at the commence-
ment of the Dc Aniiqiutaie : —
1 A serious controversy arose between a certain Oxonian and the
Cambridge orator concerning the antiquity of either University, one
which will become more serious if the dispute is not settled . . . The
cause of this great controversy was this. The Cambridge orator1, when
he delivered his oration on the occasion of the visit of the Queen to
the University of Cambridge in the nones of August [Aug. 5th] 1564,
amongst other things by chance stated briefly that the Cambridge
University was ancient and much more ancient than Oxford . . . Hence
a certain Oxonian taking offence sets to work on the opposite side, at
a commentary which he calls, " The assertion of the Antiquity of the
University of Oxford," in which he insists with great contention that
the Oxford University was far older than the Cambridge. . . . Two
years after these things took place at Cambridge, he, by the interposi-
tion of a friend at court, exhibited this commentary to the same Queen
Elizabeth, when her Majesty on the day before the Kalends of Septem-
ber [Aug. 31st, 1566] visited Oxford ".'
The certain Oxonian was Thomas Caius of Oxford, and from what
he afterwards wrote in his Am'madverswnes, it seems that both the
MS. copies of this Assertion came improperly into the hands of the
Cambridge Caius, and that he printed it, as already said, without the
author's knowledge or leave, prefixing his answer to it at the same
time 3.
Further, as has been said, a letter was written to the Cambridge
orator, which supplied him, so to speak, with a 'brief on which
to base his oration, and there is good reason to suppose that John
1 William Masters, Fellow of Kings College, was Public Orator at Cambridge
at the time of the Queen's visit. An account of this visit is preserved, from the
pen of Dr Nicolas Robinson, in which direct reference is made to Masters' orat.on,
both as to the place whence it was delivered and the manner in which the Queen
listened to it when seated on a somewhat restive horse.
- Dc Antiqtiilate, Hearne's ed., p. 3.
s His story is briefly as follows : A friend showed him the Cambridge speech,
and asked him if he could overthrow the arguments in it. He obeyed, and within the
space of one week wrote a treatise, or little commentary, to which he affixed the title
Asscrtio Antiquitatis Oxonicnsis Acadcmiac, and immediately sent it to the person
at whose request it had been written ; he was, however, far from anticipating that
it would be committed to the press. After some days it was received by a person of
meat authority, and not restored. Another copy was therefore made to be kept at
home A certain person wished to inspect it, and he gave it, unknown to the
writer to the Kail of Leicester, who kept it in his library, until a certain Cam-
bridge antiquary, calling himself Londinensis, getting possession of |both copies,
>formulis excudendum cura.it, adjuncta simul sua satis aculcata ct mordaa
apologia ' Hearne's ed., p. 316
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 1$
Caius was himself the author of it, since he prints it in the forefront of
his treatise, as follows : —
' Cambridge, says the Antiquary in his letter to the orator, had its
origin Anno Mundi 4321 \ according to the " Cambridge Black-book,"
in which you find many things concerning the origin of the Cambridge
University. From other ancient books which I have seen I have learnt
that it begins in the year of the world 1829, and in the year 3377 and
4095 and 3588, and this last one I think to be the true one, because it
was about this time that King Gurguntius lived, and it was during his
reign all agree that Cambridge had its origin I do not find any
other founder named than the Spanish Cantaber except by Polydore
Virgil, who refers its origin to a more recent time, which does not
seem to be likely for many causes. That the University acknowledges
Cantaber as its founder, its letter to Philip of Spain, written August 4,
1544, shows. These notes will satisfy your request, and I would rather
excite your own researches as to the matter. I write no more. Vale.
' Thus far the letter of the Antiquary, written familiarly, he never
suspecting, I believe, that it would ever be published V
The speech of the orator before the Queen, which is said to have
challenged the Oxonian, is as follows : —
' It remains still, most excellent Princess, since the cradles of the
many different colleges have been briefly noticed, to explain in a few
words when our University itself began to exist. It is written in our
History that it was built by a certain Cantaber, King of Spain, who,
when driven out from his country by civil war took refuge in our
kingdom. Leland accuses the authors of this opinion of vanity and
falsehood, and makes King Sigebert the founder of our University, in
doing which he has left behind him the pernicious example of too
curiously inquiring into histories3, and he is little consistent with him-
self. For if he does not believe the many authorities so wonderfully
in agreement on this point, how can he expect others, exercising some-
what more caution, to put any trust in him alone? But whether one
refers to this or that author, this is manifest amongst all that our Uni-
versity is many more years older than Oxford. For that is said to
have been established by King Alfred, whom everybody knows was
much later as to date than both Gurguntius and Sigebert. Besides, to
our great glory, all histories with one voice4 testify that the Oxford
1 No notice can possibly be taken of the chronological systems adopted by any of
the writers in regard to this early myth. It would be an endless task.
2 De Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 11.
3 This attack upon Leland is very characteristic, but it is caused by his having
reported upon the Cambridge Black-book in his annotations to the ' Cygnea Cantio '
as follows : ' Profecto nihil unquam legi vaniiis, sed neque stultius aut stupidius.'
4 Comments on such expressions as these are needless. It can only be presumed
that the orator calculated that strong assertion would be accepted as evidence by
his audience, but it was scarcely complimentary to the astuteness of Queen
Elizabeth.
26 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
University borrowed from Cambridge its most learned men, who in its
schools provided the earliest cradle oi the "mge«me artes, and I that
] ' "is , and Cologne were derived from our University, and had on
AW in who was the disciple of Bede, and who was the tat at Pans to
open, for those who desired to learn, a place for studymg bona* aries.
Thus far the orator '.' .
A creat part of the .W/f* Antiquifatis Academuu Oxon, which was
written in reply, is of course taken up in refutation of these statements
about Cambridge, but the Oxford writer is evidently much tied for >n
overthrowing the foundation on which the champion of the Cambridge
story relies, he sees that there is great danger of sapping those on
whteh his own Oxford story rests. The author, however thus lays
down at the beginning his proposition as to the antiquity of Oxford,
basing it upon what he assumes to be a known fact that Alfred
founded a college, and upon the implied fact that there was a University
here long before:— .
• It is certain („.,*,*) that the college of the ™"F*' *** "£
Was called the Great Hall of the University, was founded by the very
good and likewise very learned Prince Alfred .... .about the year
8873, in the first or at most the second year from the beginning of his
eign. At which time he applied all his powers towards the restora tmn
of our University which a good many of our writers call the founda-
tion For it may be gleaned, as well from many other writers as
from our own History', that there was a celebrated School of Philoso-
phers sprung originally from those Greek Philosophers who, together
witTthe Trojans, under the leadership of Brutus, landed upon tms
ind When indeed he [the writer of the Mstoriola] wishes to prove
hat Oxford University was by far the most ancient of all the schools
of the Christian world, he adds, in the place of the proof, the arrival of
the said Philosophers at Crekelade, or more accurately Grekocolade
narrating on what occasion they had come thither and how after some
time they chose the city of Oxford as a convenient place for their
rcTdence both on account of its proximity and its pleasant situation
Meanwhile, however, he makes no mention of Alfmd, whom ^eed
he would not thus have passed over if he had been the firs tbu, Ider ro
our city. I know, however, there are not wanting men also of great
learning, who affirm that nothing can be gleaned in proving the ,ns titn-
ion from the BrfwM* because there is no mention made ■ n it rf the
translation of the Philosophers thence to Oxford, either at what time
or for what reason or by whom the translation was ; effe cted
'There are others also who, on the authority of the Mac k-book of
Cambridge, assert that the Grekelade schools were originally instituted
by Penda, king of the Mercians, by permission of King Cedwalla, and
. Thomac Caii Antiqu„atis AsserHo, Hearne's ed., p. *I. ft has been thought
well to give this orator's speech in the original in Appendix A, § 1 4-.
• The Historiola. See ante, p. io.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 27
that afterwards they were translated by Alfred to Oxford. Which
indeed I believe to be just so far true as that it is probable that a
tyrant so cruel, impious, and bloody .... ever thought of establishing
any general places of learning at all. But I return to the point.
Although this History of ours does not contain these things directly,
it implies them, if the reader will only examine the matter attentively
and thoroughly. For what other fact, I ask, does this weighty narrative
above mentioned concerning the Philosophers of Grekelade record if
it is not that, some time after their arrival, allured by the attractions
of a more pleasant habitation, they came to Oxford, which change was
easy on account of its vicinity, and that leaving their former abode
their disciples taught philosophy here as they had formerly taught it at
Grekecolade x ? '
Here we have the chief evidence adduced by the champion on the
Oxford side, on which he had to rely for sustaining the greater
antiquity of Oxford as against the arguments used in the orator's speech
before Queen Elizabeth 2.
He next proceeds to adduce other arguments, beginning with a
strange one from a treatise by Walter Burley, entitled Summa causarum
problematum Aristotelis, in which the writer incidentally refers to the
situation of Oxford as agreeable to the principles laid down by ancient
philosophers, inasmuch as it was flat and open towards the north and
east, and hilly towards the south and west/adding that the place was no
doubt fixed on by the industry of the Greek philosophers. But as the
writer flourished circa 1470-1500 he had heard the story, and the
value of his evidence is therefore no greater than that of the theory
that the site of Oxford was chosen in accordance with the rules of
Aristotelian philosophy 3.
Next, he adduces the MS. marginal note, which, as he says, Leland
once added to a passage in the Historia of Polydore Virgil4, and
which has already been given. It does not seem, however, to occur
to him that the value of such evidence would depend upon the value of
1 the certain, writers of great antiquity' to which he says Leland refers.
It is much the same with a similar paragraph in the Historiola which
he next quotes, and in which the authority runs (as has been seen)
'prout suae fundationis insinuant hisloriae Brita nicae perantiquae^l
1 Assertio Antiquitatis, Hearne's ed., p. 276.
2 See extract from the orator's speech given above, p. 25.
3 Assertio Antiquitatis, Hearne's ed., p. 279. Walter Burley wrote several
treatises on different portions of Aristotle, though one bearing that precise title has
not been observed.
4 Assertio, Hearne's ed., p. 279. See ante, p. 16.
5 It is rather singular that Antony Wood in quoting the Historiola, which he
puts forward in the forefront of his argument {Annals, vol. i., 4to, Oxon, 1 792, p. 8),
omits the reference to Historiae Britannicaeperantiquae, as if he knew it was worthless.
28 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
His next point is that if a book of Leland, which he wrote before
his death, were to see the light, it would prove that Oxford was more
ancient than Cambridge. He then, thinking enough has been said to
prove the antiquity of Oxford, proceeds to attack the position of the
orator as to the antiquity of Cambridge. Throughout the remain-
ing thirty pages of the edition in the small size, Oxford is scarcely
mentioned, and then only in a general way as being older than Cam-
bridge, based on passages from Leland1, from Polydore Virgil2, and
from die Historia Regici*.
The Cambridge champion, in his reply, gives the letter of the orator
and the orator's speech, as has been seen, and then quotes the Oxford
Historiola, which has already been printed entire so far as it affects this
early history; he then remarks (only too justly) that on this document
almost all the whole of the argument of the Oxford champion rests.
He then begins at once to defend the Cambridge story, excusing rather
than justifying the date of Anno Mundi 1829 for its foundation. In
fact, "the whole of his first book is taken up with adding pseudo-
authorities for his Cambridge story, and in answering the attack upon
it by the Oxonian. Here and there, however, he incidentally refers to
the Oxford story as regards the position of his antagonist, tor
instance, he takes note 4 of the reference to Leland's book, De Academm
which would do so much, according to the Oxonian, if it were only
published, by remarking that the argument reminds him of the
proverb ' Si caelum ruat caper cntur alaudae? Again, in meeting one
of the attacks of the Oxonian (more bold than usual considering his
position) when he adduced the fact that neither Geoffrey of Monmouth
nor the Historia Regia made any mention of Cantaber ; he successfully,
so far as he is concerned, parries the assertion by rejoining : —
'Neither does Henry of Huntingdon nor the Historia S. Albani, in
the life of Alfred, make any mention of the Oxford school Nor does
Matthaeus Florilcgus. In no life of Alfred is there a word about the
Oxford University. I read that Exonia (in some written Oxonia) was
besieged by Alfred, but of the schools of Oxford instituted by him I
read nothing, nor indeed even in John Capgrave's life ot S Neot in
his hook which he wrote about English Saints, is there anything; but
in this there is a good deal about the English school at Rome. Was
there therefore no Oxford University? or was there no Cantaber ?
1 Asstrtio, Hearne's ed., p. 282. 2 Ibid; P' *01'
3 Ibid P so2. This Historia Regia is often cited. It seems to be the same as
Historia Buriensis, i. e. a chronicle compiled by a monk of Bury in the time of, and
as i . said, at the command of, Richard II. It has not been printed, nor IS it, it is
believed, worth printing.
* De Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 29. AWQ. p. 10.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 29
And so again later on, arguing as to the term schola and scholae, he
refers to the Oxford argument by saying : —
' If the plural number is of any value towards making the word
mean a University let it be so because Sigebert placed schools at Cam-
bridge, and therefore he founded the University at the same time he
founded the schools. And it necessarily follows that you must allow
also that the University of Oxford was not first of all a University, but
a grammar school such as Eton or Winchester. For Asser, in his work
" De gestis Alfredi" says he gave the third part of his goods to a School
which he had zealously collected together from the boys of his own
nation, whether noble by birth or otherwise V
With the exception of these few incidental references to the Oxford
argument, the first half of his work, which he styles Liber I, is occupied
wholly with a defence of the Cambridge story. It consists of over
250 pages of the small size of the edition of 1568. The second book,
of about 100 pages in the same edition, consists of an attack upon
the arguments put forth for the antiquity of Oxford. The writer does
not confine himself to those arguments only which are adduced so
briefly by his antagonist in the forty pages of the Assertio, but he goes
over many others, and with most praiseworthy industry seems to have
searched out all the passages which had been, or might have been,
adduced by different controversialists in favour of the Oxford story,
only, of course, for the purpose of answering them, or exhibiting
their discrepancies one with another, or their general inconsistency
with known history.
He begins 2 with the unsatisfactory character of the assertion of the
Historiola that Oxford was the first and foremost ' of all other Latin
Universities of the world/ which fact was said to be derived from
' historiae Britannicae perantiquae] and he amuses himself with some
criticism upon the theory that the Trojans, who had to fight the
Britons to gain possession of the land, should bring Greek philosophers
with them. Then he proceeds to pull to pieces the Creklade story,
both as to its vicinity to Oxford, on which such stress is laid, and its
name ; also, as to what it was called before Grekelade, the various
spellings, and finally the discrepancies between the several stories as
given by the different chroniclers adduced, such as Leland, Rous, the
Historiola, and the Chronicon Jornallense. But he makes his points good
solely for this reason, that each of these chroniclers are referred to by
his antagonist as independent authorities, and consequently it is easy
to show that the different stories will not hold together. His arguments,
1 De Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 117. 2 Ibid. p. 176.
3o THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
however, though tedious, often bring out very clearly the baseless
character of the myth. He then turns aside ' to discuss a point which
he says that the Oxonian brings forward in his Asseriio, that certain
Clementine Constitutions mention Oxford and do not mention Cam-
bridge. But as the Constitutions in question were only promulgated at
the Council of Vienna in 131 1 it is difficult to see why the question is
introduced at this point. He soon returns, however, to discuss the
names of Bellositum, Oxonium, &c, and the terms Cms/re and Caer.
His ability to cope with such questions critically may be gauged by the
following sentence :—
< And so if it had been established as a city, or named by the Britons,
it would have been called Caeroxon; if by the Saxons Oxenchester, or
Oxenforde from Oxonium, the earlier but not ancient name, and /or*;
not Oxonium'1?
After some rather objectless disquisition on the Caer-penu-hel-goit,
said by Geoffrey of Monmouth to be Exonia (which may in one or
two instances have been written Oxonia\ he expresses his disbelief in
BeVositum being a proper name ; but he thinks it was a casual name
given on account of its pleasing situation. He holds3 that the most
ancient name of Oxford must be Ridohen, for which opinion he relies
on the seventh book of Geoffrey of Monmouth, and the fifth book of
the Eulogium Historiarum ; and as Boso is named as Consul of
Ridohen he finds that Boso and Vadum Bourn must have necessarily
the same origin, and therefore substantiate the story. It is almost
impossible, however, to follow his argument, nor does it appear very
plainly in what way he upsets his antagonist, who has only to fall
back upon Rous's ingenious theory of a succession of names.
At the end of this disquisition he comes to the story of Alfreds
foundation, which he treats as follows :—
'But, however this be, there is not mentioned anywhere one
word, so far as I know, of a University here whether called by the
name of Oxford or by the older name, before the time of Alfred. After
the time of Ranulph [i.e. Ralph Higden] who lived about ad. 1363,
almost all authors whom I have seen, and I have seen a good many,
recognise Alfred to be the founder: even Graius assenting to it and
Sir jean de Monteville*. Knight, who wrote in French an account of
1 De Antumitatc, Ilearne's ed., p. 186.
* Ibid p 100. He is possibly referring to the fact that Geoffrey of Monmouth
in one place uses the name Oxonia in reference to supposed BnUsh times.
1 5!££jta discovered what he means unless it be Sir John Mandeville. Of his
book, an edition was printed as early as .499. and another edition was published the
same year as the De Antiqiulatc, 1. e. 1568.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 31
his journey to Jerusalem in the year 1367. He, that is Graius, in the
Scala Cronica, in the life of Alfred, writes thus, " Ceste Roi A lured fist
etablir le um-versite de Oxenforde1."'
He argues that Leland, on whom his antagonist has relied so
implicitly for overthrowing the Cantaber story, makes Alfred the actual
founder of the University, not the restorer, and the same Polydore Virgil
and Ranulph [Higden] do before him. He meets, too, the argu-
ment which the Oxford champion had drawn from the Historiola in
respect to its silence about Alfred, by asking2, 'If it were only a
restoration, and not a foundation, how is it that it is not mentioned by
other writers in so many words ?' He also comments on the statement
that Alfred founded University Hall, and questions how this agrees
with the restoration of the University. He then touches upon some
further objections as to the Cricklade schools, and, quoting from the
Chronicon Jornallense, shows that the authorities are not agreed
whether the Cricklade schools were transferred to Oxford in the time of
the Britons, or in the time of the Saxons, or in the time even of King
Alfred, and whether or not, after they were restored, they died out.
Here is an example of a clever piece of reasoning on these points : —
' From this and that, it also necessarily follows that : If the Cricklade
schools were swept away before the time of Alfred so neither are the
Oxford scholars sprung from them, nor were they created or increased
by the translation, or restored by Alfred since they were not before
this sprung from the Philosophers, nor could they by reason of the
vicinity of the two have coalesced with them. And in the second
place, that which is of still greater weight must be added from history,
that in the time of Alfred there was no grammar school at all through-
out the whole western kingdom. And this you would be able to aver
much more surely if you read Alfred's letter to the Bishop of Wor-
cester V
Hitherto his arguments perhaps may appear somewhat weak,
because they depend upon the mere words rather than on the general
sense of the Chronicles ; but, as already said, if the passages quoted
are received as authorities in the sense in which his antagonist receives
them, these arguments have considerable weight. At this point, how-
1 Scala Chronica, by Thomas Graius, MS. Lamb. 22. It has not been ascer-
tained at what date this author wrote.
2 De Antiquitatt, Hearne's ed., p. 193.
3 Ibid. p. 200. By this vague reform he means no doubt the Preface to Alfred's
version of the Cura Pastoralis of Gregory, though in this treatise Alfred does
not say there was no grammar school. All he says is that there were very few on
this side of the Humber who were able to understand their service in English, or
even to turn a letter from Latin into English : still a passage in Asser justifies the
statement that there were no grammar schools.
32 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
ever, he seems to enter upon a new and more vigorous course of
action. He begins to consider the authority of 'the authorities!'
Hitherto he had attacked the Oxonian on lines parallel to those on
which the latter had defended his position with regard to the antiquity
of Oxford, namely, by accepting the statements of writers of all periods,
as if they were equally reliable. They were, it is true, the same lines
to which he had adhered in defending his story of Cantaber— indeed,
the only lines appearing to be at all tenable under the circumstances.
On the other hand, too, the Oxonian, during his attack upon them,
scarcely ever ventured to move beyond the lines he had drawn for his
own defence. Now, however, the Cambridge champion, having
arrived at the time of King Alfred, completely changes his tactics.
He has driven his adversary away from his positions, which gave him
Cricklade and Bellositum in British times, by pressing on him the
importance of the reiterated statements of several authors that Alfred
was the first founder of the University of Oxford. He now over-
throws the statements of these very authors, and will not allow that
the University of Oxford can boast of an antiquity even as early as
this.
It will be remembered that the argument in the orator s speech was
that while Cambridge could boast of Cantaber as its founder, and, if
not that, at least King Sigebert (which even its supposed enemies were
said to allow), the University of Oxford could only go back to Alfred,
< whom everybody knows was much later as to date than both Gur-
guntius and Sigebert V Now, however, the credit of Alfred's foundation
is an object of attack : —
< If in the whole western kingdom there were no schools, where were
those of Oxford ? If in the time of Alfred there were none, how could
Alfred be a founder of your school ? how a benefactor ? But if he was
not the founder, where is the invention of your Higden, and where
that of Higden's mimic your Historic* Regia^. and of all those who
follow in the wake about Alfred being the founder of the Oxford
School, of the variety of the Arts taught, and the number of the privi-
leges ? For they write that Alfred established the University ot Oxtord,
and rendered the city famous by his many privileges granted to it,
which are certainly nothing else but mere figments, composed for the
sake of glorifying the University of Oxford, or else glorifying Neot, as
we shall presently show. For Asser, the Chaplain of Alfred, Capgrave,
and Osbern in the life of S. Neot, Henry of Huntingdon and \\ .ham
of Malmesbury, in the acts of King Alfred make mention of the Eng-
i See the orator's speech, ante, P. 25 (Hearne, p. 282) Also note Cairns' argu-
ment, ante, p. 30 (Heame, p. .92), though previously he had already hinted at this
line of argument : ante, p. 2S (Hearne, p. no).
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 33
lish school at Rome (which Ina erected, and Ethel wulf, Alfred's father,
restored) and how it was endowed with Pontifical privileges at the
request of Alfred, but say nothing of the Oxford school founded by
Alfred or furnished with Charters V
Then, referring to the historical improbabilities of Alfred founding a
school in Mercia at that time, and a chronological difficulty in reference
to Neot's death, he concludes with : —
* Wherefore I think it is through an error of the Scribes that they
speak of Schola Oxoniensis when they should say Romana. Otherwise
Asser who was one of the familiar friends of, and attendants upon,
Alfred, and to whom everything of his life and actions were known,
would most certainly have recorded this as something most worthy of
memorial V
It would almost appear that, having come nearly to the end of his
book, his work had taught him the right way of proceeding, for he
devotes two or three pages to a disquisition on the relative credit to be
given to statements made by the older and the newer authors, and
amongst other observations makes the following : —
1 For those more recent writers who seem to hand down blunders
as it were hand from hand, and sometimes add a blunder or so of their
own as well, just so far as they deviate much from historic fidelity so far
they corrupt much which the older historians set forth truthfully V
He then proceeds 4 to give some examples of his theory. They are
certainly not well chosen, but they show that he has more than a
glimmer of the truth respecting historical data becoming more and
more impure as they descend further from the source. When one
reads these later pages of his second book, one cannot but ask, ' if
only he had applied those principles in the slightest degree to the two
hundred and fifty pages of his first book, where would two hundred
and forty of them have been ? '
It is only right, perhaps, after exhibiting the defence of and attack
upon the antiquity of the Oxford University, to say a few words about
the discussions as regards the antiquity of the Cambridge University.
Besides being only fair, it will be useful, as the growth of the myths
appear to have gone on very much pari passu — the one series explains
and illustrates the other ; and lastly, because the rivalry between the
two Universities, which in its earliest stages had not the benefit of the
printing-press to chronicle the disputes, has been, there can be little
doubt, an important factor in the propagation of the myths which
have surrounded the early history of the two foundations.
1 De Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 202. 2 Ibid. p. 204.
3 Ibid. p. 206. * Ibid. p. 207.
D
-4 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
The outline of the story of Cantaber in one of its stages and
perhaps the earliest, has already been given from the pages of Rous,
and to this stage an approximate date may be assigned of a.d .49°-
It rests practically upon the same ground, and may be correlated with
the parbcular stage of the story of Mempric, as detailed by the same
chronicler It is mainly a combination of stories which have grown
up around guesses either of an historical or etymological nature.
Ro us, as already said, may well have seen the Oxford Hstonola as
We now have it, when he compiled his Oxford story, and worked it
into his chronicle ; but if he had seen the Cambridge *«*~*?*«
he wro-e his ' His /on a rcgum Anglic*', he certainly did not think it
necessary to insert much from it, and his own story in some particulars
differs widely from it. He adopts the theory that a person named
Cantaber was founder of Cambridge, and he includes the story of Ins
founding a studium there, but goes no further. This Cambridge
HutJola, which is much longer than its Oxford representative, seems
ro L also in a higher stage of development. It has been the subject
of much criticism, but there seems to be a very general agreement m
ascribing it in substance to Nicholas Cantelupe ', who was a Welshman
but was Prior of the Carmelite Monastery in Northampton, where he
died in .441 It appears, however, that the official copy now relied
o a the chief authority was not transcribed into the Black Book till
about 1509, when Dr. Buckenham was Vice-Chancellor and in ,t may
possibh have been inserted a good deal more than was in the ongina
C by Cantelupe. It is far too long to print here entire but
Leland s summary of it, which excited the wrath of the Cambridge
champion, may not be out of place :—
•There exists at Grata Girviorum in the archives an Histonola of
an Incer 1 credit. Herein it appears that Gurguntius some .unknown
British King, gave to a Spanish Cantaber who had studied at Athens
fh" easte n part of Britain, and that he afterwards bu.lt a city on the
We ™nd established a University there, which ^«
from his son the Earl Grantanus. The same informs us that Max,.
mander and Anaxagoras, Greek Philosophers, came t .Grartab the
sake of study. There are there besides a hundred fables or the same
g7ain Truly I never read anything more empty, more foolish, or more
stupid2.'
1 The treatise, as it now appears in the Cambridge Book, is printed by Hera
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. $$
One characteristic passage, however, out of the Cambridge Historic/,
must be added to Leland's summary : —
* On this city King Cassibelaunus, when he had obtained rule over the
kingdom, bestowed great pre-eminence. . . . And on this account, and
because of the richness of the soil, the purity of the air, the abundance
of learning, and the royal clemency, there gathered thither young
men and old from the different regions of the earth, some of whom
Julius Caesar after he had gained a victory over Cassibelaunus took with
him to Rome, where afterwards they became famous for their Rhetoric1.
It will also be well, perhaps, to give a version of the story as it
appears in the pages of Polydore Virgil, the first edition of whose
Historia Anglica was published in 1534, and therefore almost con-
temporary with the Cygnea Can/io of Leland, especially as it is (in
part) quoted by the Oxford champion : —
' If we believe the fabrications (commentis) of an unknown author,
the origin of the city is older than the University 2, For they say that
there was formerly a city by name Chergrantium (sic) at the foot of a
neighbouring hill which they call Fuyt-hill, and that while Gurguntius,
the son of Bellinus was king, a certain Bartholomew, a man of Can-
tabria (Bartholomeum quemdam hominem Cantabrum) came there for
the sake of teaching, and married Chembrigia daughter of the king, and
that he built a city called after the name of his wife Cantabrigiam, and
in that first taught. I now however return to history V
It will be seen here how the etymological element predominates.
Not content with making Cantabrigia come from Cantaber^ who must
have a local habitation as well as name, we have the river Cante, and the
earl Grantanus ; and Polydore Virgil caps the whole, as if almost he was
indulging in sarcasm, by introducing Che?nbrigia. No doubt, how-
ever, it was a Cambridge story like the rest, first told as a guess, and
then passed on as a fact, and then told as history, leaving the
historians to find a place and a date for the lady. It illustrates the
Greeklade of the Oxford story, and all that followed from it.
The other myth relating to the foundation of the Cambridge
University, which is laid stress upon in the controversy, is an
interesting one as far as it shows at what shadows the writers were
1 Quoted from the Cambridge Historia as printed in Sprotti Chronicon, ed.
Heame, p. 265. It is so characteristic a passage that it is given in the Appendix
A, §15.
2 It must be remembered that Polydore Virgil elsewhere ascribes the University
to King Sigebert in the seventh century.
3 Polydori Virgilii Historia Anglica, lib. v. First ed., Basil, 1534. Douay ed.,
i2mo, 1603, p. 296. Quoted by the Oxford champion, Heame, p. 285, and
accurately so. He however prints Whit-kill for Vuyt-hill. Polydore Virgil
died in 1555.
D 2
36 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
ready to grasp, so as to gain a point in their favour. It is the story of
Felix, Bishop of the East Angles, founding the University of Cambridge,
and it rests wholly upon a single passage in Beda's Ecclesiastical
History, which runs as follows : —
'At this time [i.e. a.d. 636] ■ Sigbert ruled over the kingdom of the
East Angles .... a good and religious man, who some time before,
had been baptized in Gaul whilst he was living there in exile; and
returning home, as soon as he came to the throne, being desirous to
imitate those things which he had seen to be well ordered in Gaul, set
up a school in which youths might be instructed in letters ; and this
with the assistance of Bishop Felix, whom he had received from Kent,
and who furnished them with teachers and masters after the manner
of the Kentish men V
Naturally this brief passage has given rise to much conjecture, both
as to what schools in Kent are referred to, and where the school was
established in East Anglia. Taking into account the surrounding
circumstances, it is clear that the object which Sigbert had, and which
Bede, in recounting this circumstance evidently wished to show he
had, was to supply education for a native clergy, and not to be
dependent on priests from Gaul or Italy. That such a school had
already been established at Canterbury was certainly Bede's belief, and
he may well have held it from the facts supplied to him by Nothelm,
and which he duly records, namely, that when the see of Canterbury was
vacant in 628, the reigning Pope appointed as a successor in the see
Honorius from the school at Rome, but that in 644 Ithamar, a Kentish
man, was 8 appointed to the see of Rochester. He was the first native
Bishop, and as there is no reason whatever to suppose he had journeyed
to Rome to be educated, it would appear that between the dates above
named a native school had sprung up for the education of priests.
Bishop Felix in 636, seeing the advantage of providing a native
clergy, and so the necessity of supplying means for their education,
naturally followed the Canterbury plan, and as his seat was at Domnoc
it is only reasonable to suppose that Bishop Felix established his
school, where now in all probability the waves of the sea wash, that
is, if the old Domnoc is correctly assigned to the effaced Dunwich.
But in the desire to enhance the glories of Cambridge, it was sug-
gested that the school must have been at Cambridge, and therefore
1 The date is fixed by the entry in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which under
this year records, 'And Bishop Felix preached the faith of Christ to the East
Angles.' Nothing is here recorded about founding any school, so that all the story
rests wholly and absolutely upon the authority of Beda.
2 Beda, bk. iii. cap. 18. The original runs: * instituit scholam in cpia pueri
literis erudirentur.' ■ Ibid. bk. iii. 14.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. tf
that Cambridge could date back to the time of King Sigbert. This
story, which first finds a place in the Chronicon Jornalknse1, was hold-
ing good in the early part of the sixteenth century, as is gathered
from Leland and Polydore Virgil, but later on its rival, the far more
wonderful story of Cantaber and the Greek philosophers, eclipsed it,
so that, as we have seen, Leland is looked upon by the Cambridge
champion as an enemy rather than a friend, for recording even such a
momentary belief in Sigebert's foundation as the brief extract warrants.
This story of Sigebert runs very much on the same lines as the story
of Alfred. It would seem almost that the same reasoning must have
been applied in both instances ; e.g. We have a University of Cambridge.
We read that King Sigebert founded a school. That school must be
Cambridge University, because Sigebert was king of the East Angles,
and Cambridge is within the territory which once bore that name.
And in the case of Oxford a similar argument would run : We read
that Alfred founded schools ; one of them must have been Oxford, for
Oxford bordered on the kingdom of Wessex.
There are several other arguments brought forward on the Cam-
bridge side equally worthless, for which, however, parallel examples
may be found on the side of Oxford. First of all there is the
circumstance that Beda mentions Cambridge 2 ; but the fact is Gran-
chester only is mentioned, which is two miles away from Cambridge,
nor is it spoken of otherwise than as a small deserted Roman city,
amidst the ruins of which they discovered a coffin, which they used
for burying Queen Ethelfrith3.
Then we have as much as can be' made out of the very doubtful list
of British cities4, which occur in the pages of Nennius, amongst which
Caer Grauth appears, and this, having become Caer Grant, is sup-
posed to be the Granchester of Beda, and so Cambridge.
Less easy to follow is the supposed connection of King Lucius with
Cambridge, whose name is made to occur, with that of Asclepiodorus
Constantine, Uther Pendragon, and Arthur in a charter granted to
Cambridge by King Cadwallader5, but composed and written in the
fifteenth century. Again, it would appear from certain very doubtful
'Burton Annals,' that Christianity flourished at Cambridge before
King Lucius, for the following is quoted from this source : — ' a.d. 141.
This year were baptized nine of the Doctors and Scholars of Cam-
1 Twisden, Decern Scriptores, London, 1652, col. 814. The passage has already-
been given, p. 14.
2 De Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 127. 3 Beda, bk. iv. cap. 19.
4 De Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 47. 5 Ibid. p. 64.
38 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
bridge/ After some digression, he expresses his opinion (con/'icio)
that the missionaries of Tope Eleutherius, i.e. Elwan and Medwin,
were alumni of the University of Cambridge1. There is much more
of the same kind, but enough has been given.
The most remarkable evidence relied upon is that which is attached
to the documents in the Cambridge Black Book. In that we find a
charter of King Arthur (but written in all the style of the fifteenth
century), in which he grants, liccniia sedis Apostolicae, that the Scholars
and Doctors are to have certain liberties, such as King Lucius decreed
when he embraced Christianity, in consequence of the preaching of
the Cambridge Doctors, and which has this date : — ' Datum anno ab
Incarnatione Domini 531, vii. die Aprilis in Civitate London2.' It
should be added that Cantabrigiensis devotes several pages to sustaining
its genuine character, and from the same source he quotes a charter
from Pope Honorius with regard to the privileges of the Chancellor,
' Script 'um apud sanctum Pet rum anno ab incarnatione verbi 624, 21 die
FebruariiJ adding gravely that this too was before King Sigebert and
Bishop Felix3. He then gives a charter from Pope Sergius, Scripta
Romae in ecclesia Later anensi anno ab Incarnatione Verbi 689, tertio die
mensis Maii4, with some five or six pages, proving that these charters
are as genuine as that of King Arthur. It would seem, if his state-
ments are to be trusted, that the two latter were used successfully
in a law-suit between the University and the Bishop of Ely in 1430.
If they were forged for the purpose at this date, it would not be
unreasonable to suppose that Nicolas Cantelupe (who died in 144 1)
was their author as well as of the charter of Arthur, as there is
considerable family resemblance between the series and the rest of
the Cambridge Historia.
Looking back at the controversy as a whole, what strikes one most
is, first, the vast number of authors from which the champions obtain
their evidence ; secondly, the worthless character of by far the greater
portion. It is not as if they were unacquainted with the sources of
our history. Printed editions of the most important and, so to speak,
standard historical authorities, were already accessible, and, as is
shown, they had a wide acquaintance with MSS. preserved in libraries, so
that in judging of the merits of the case, we must not attribute anything
1 Dc Antiquitate, Hearne's cd., p. 67.
2 This and the others will be found printed in full from the Cambridge Black
Book, by Ilearnc, at the end of his ' Sprotti Chronicon.' It is quoted by the Cam-
bridge champion in Dt Antiquitate, Hearne's cd., p. 4S.
3 Dc Antiquitate, Hearne's ed., p. 52. 4 Ibid. p. 57.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 39
to the ignorance on the part of the combatants of the material which
existed for the purpose of the discussion. The fact is that with all the
advantages resulting from later historical research, with the admirable
work which has been carried on for years in the MS. departments of
the British Museum and other public libraries in cataloguing and
rendering their treasures accessible ; with the similar work which has
gone on at the Public Record Office, and by the Historical Record Com-
mission, and with the printing also of the long series of historians under
the direction of the Master of the Rolls, we have not obtained any further
evidence than they possessed in support of their respective arguments.
No records have been found, simply from the fact that no records exist.
The controversy does not seem to have produced any other works
during Elizabeth's reign. As has been said, the MS. of Thomas
Caius, the Oxford champion, lay unpublished. But the case was
taken up in the following reign and in the following century by Bryan
Twyne, i.e. in 1608.
Before, however, reaching this date, an event has to be recorded of
very great importance to the controversy. The result of the contest
seemed to show that the real issue lay with the proof of Alfred
having founded the University of Oxford. The attack upon this was
felt to be the boldest, as well as the most formidable, of any made
by the Cambridge champion. It was seen by scholars that, in spite of
the exertions of J. Caius, neither the fiction about Cantaber, nor the
deduction from the few words of Beda about Bishop Felix in regard to
Cambridge could be upheld, in comparison with the supposed claim of
Alfred; and it is not improbable that this weighed with Archbishop
Parker in issuing his edition of Asser1 in 1574: for in this authoritative
work the name of Oxford was not even mentioned, nor did it contain
any statement in connection with Alfred's desire to further education,
which could with any good reason be connected with the town ; and
this negative evidence would do more for the Cambridge cause than
any attempt to support the feeble stories on which the Cambridge
champion had relied. This edition of Asser the Archbishop printed in
1 ' Aelfredi Res Gestae editae a Mat. Parker. Literis Saxonicis sed Lingua Latina.
Una cum praefatione latina,' fol. Lond. 1574. The words he uses form a link in
the chain of the evidence and so must be given. He writes in the Preface (p. 1) :
' Latina autem cum sint, Saxonicis literis excudi curavimus, maxime ob venerandam
ipsius archetypi antiquitatem ipso adhuc (ut opinio fert mea), Aelfredo superstite,
iisdem literarum formulis descriptam.' It is thought from this that he had seen the
early MS. of the tenth or eleventh century preserved in the Cottonian Library, and
that he had used it for his text, but it must be admitted that the passage only
amounts to circumstantial evidence. What he probably used was a copy which
he may well have compared with the original Cottonian MS.
40 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Saxon type, for the reason, so his preface implies, that the original
MS. was so ancient.
A few years later, i.e. in 1603, an edition of Asscr was published in
a collection of various chronicles at Frankfort1, with the name of the
illustrious Camden as editor, and this contained exactly the passage
which was wanted on the Oxford side, and with certain names and
details which seemed to give the whole a most circumstantial aspect,
and the appearance of being a genuine work of a contemporary writer,
and, therefore, probably of Asser himself.
Since so much depends on this passage in Asser, some few words
must be introduced respecting its insertion, and the prima facie
evidence which exists for it being a deliberate forgery.
As sometimes happens, the investigation of evidence of a doubtful
character is rendered still more difficult by some accident; and the
fire which took place in Little Dean's Yard, Westminster, October 23rd,
1751, and destroyed many of the Cottonian Manuscripts, destroyed
the only ancient MS. copy of Asser which was known, namely that
marked Otho A. XII. So that we have no ancient copy to refer to.
The matter is rendered at first a little complicated by the fact that
there is a MS. of Asser still in the Cottonian Collection marked
Otho A. XII, but which is not the one referred to by Archbishop
Parker, for it is written on paper, and of the sixteenth century2.
Fortunately, however, we have clear and indisputable evidence of the
existence of such a MS. as that referred to, and since it is important to
substantiate this, as it is the groundwork on which all other questions
rest, three witnesses will be adduced. The first evidence is that given
by the catalogue of the Cottonian Library made several years before
the fire (i.e. 1696). Thomas Smith, who was employed to catalogue
the MSS., describes Otho A. XII. as containing a considerable number
of lives of saints and ancient fragments (against one or two of which
is printed the word Saxonicc), and of which the first given is Asserius
Menevensis de gestis Alfredi Regis, Charactere antiqiw. Secondly, in
a copy of this catalogue preserved in the Bodleian Library 3 a MS. note
has been added by Wanley himself, who had the chief charge of the
collection, viz. ' Codex Membr. in ^io constant foliis 155, ifol. lacerum.
The third testimony is that of Francis Wise, who in 1772, that is nine
years before the fire, printed an edition of Asser, and in his preface he
1 Anglica, Normannica, Hibcrnica, CaHibrica, a vctcribus Scn'pta. Francfurt,
1602-3.
2 The Catalogue entry is Codex chartaceus in 4to constans 36 foliis.
5 Catalogus. Bibl. Cotton. Thorn. Smith 1696. Bodl. (Gough, London.) No. 54.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 41
first tells of three late MS. copies : one quite recent, which he says seems
to have been the very copy used by Archbishop Parker (and which
was lent to him by Gale): a second, a recent one kept in St. James'
Palace : a third in Corpus College Library, Cambridge, of about
200 years back (i.e. 1530), and which is only a copy of the Cottonian
MS. But, he adds, the most ancient of all which now exists is the
Cottonian; and James Hill, of the Middle Temple, having sent him
a specimen, he has had it engraved, and it appears in his book. It
may be said in passing, that the specimen bears out what the Arch-
bishop says as to its antiquity. It is not written exactly in Saxon
characters, but in a hand which presents a mixture of peculiarly
formed Latin letters, and some Saxon here and there occurring. It
agrees with the note in the catalogue of ' character e antiquo] and
justifies the Archbishop's use of Saxon type to give an idea of its
antiquity, while from the general arrangement of the words and from
the errors in writing, it leaves the impression that the scribe was accus-
tomed to Saxon words and letters, and was by no means well versed
in Latin. The chief point, however, is that Wise, who has carefully
collated this MS. with the others, distinctly states that the passage
which Camden inserted in his Frankfort edition did not occur in it.
From incidental evidence we also get at the fact that none of
the later copies of the Cottonian MS. contained this passage, and none
of those existing now contain it. In a word, amidst all the evidence
(and there have been several writers who have discussed the subject,
e.g. Bryan Twyne, Archbishop Ussher, Spelman, Antony a Wood,
Wise, and others), in no case does any one state he has even seen
a manuscript of Asser with the passage in it, or even venture to say
that any one ever professed to have seen one except Camden himself.
Other points must also be noted. The passage in question did not
first appear in Camden's edition of Asser, but was published by itself
some year or so previously, namely in the 4to edition of his Britannia,
London, 16001.
In inserting this passage in his Britannia, he says, ' as we find in an
excellent MS. of the said Asser.'
In the edition of Asser which he printed at Frankfort, he professes
in his preface to follow, and actually does follow, Archbishop Parker's
edition; nevertheless he inserts this passage without a word to notify
he has made any change. This in itself is not straightforward,
for two questions naturally arise: if there existed this 'excellent MS.'
why did he not use it and revise Archbishop Parker's copy by it, and
1 The previous three editions, viz. those of 1586, 1587, and 1590 were without it.
4^ THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
show what were Archbishop Parker's unauthorised additions — what
his errors, what his omissions, if any. Secondly, why in inserting a
passage of this great importance — the most important passage of all —
did he take no notice of it in the preface, and make a statement as to
the MS., whence it was derived, if he had ever seen such a MS.?
There exists, moreover, certain correspondence touching this very
Subject, which Bryan Twyne thought of sufficient importance to
deposit in the University Archives, and this opens up many other
minor points which seem to be incapable of being cleared up in a way
to save altogether the credit of those concerned.
It appears from this correspondence that, even before the publication
of the passage in the Britannia, Twyne and others knew of it1.
Amongst the papers there is a statement that as early as December,
1599, Mr. T. Allen asked Mr. T. James to examine the MS. which
Archbishop Parker had used for his text, and which was supposed to
be in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, and to see if the passage
was in it. He could find no copy, it seems, in the Corpus Library,
but, when in London, he saw a IMS. in Lord Lumley's Library, which
he was told — and from certain indications it is clear he was rightly
told — was the MS. used by Archbishop Parker to print from. He
reported that the passage ivas not in it ; and he added, by way of extra
evidence, that it had the red ochre marks, which Archbishop Parker
made usually in the books which he read2.
This certainly ought to have prevented Bryan Twyne in 1608 from
insinuating that Archbishop Parker fraudulently omitted the passage3,
yet his words in reference to Camden's restoring the passage in-
sinuate this if they mean anything. He puts in at the end, it is true,
a saving clause, ' unless you say he may have used the imperfect copy
in the Lumley Library.' As he knew the Archbishop did use it, from
the evidence given, and from the fact that he admits he had seen it,
his attack on Matthew Parker recoils on himself.
Finally, we come to the astounding memorandum dated the 18th of
February, 1622, which Twyne has filed in the University Archives by
way, it must be supposed, of securing a currency for the forged
1 It should be stated that these particulars are mainly derived from the researches
of Messrs. Petrie and Sharpe in 1848, which they embodied in a note in the Monu-
menta Ilistorica, Pref. p. 79.
2 Bryan Twyne, Ant. Ox. Apologia, ed. 1608, p. 144. It does not appear ever
to have found its way into the Corpus Library. It is said to have been the copy
which was lent to "\\ ise by Gale, to collate for his edition.
3 Ibid. The words are : 'Quern Mattheus Cantuariensis omiserat (veritatis an
charitatis odio haud scio) dum Asserium suum Saxonicis scriptum literis edidit et
tamen cum Aristotele non edidit industrial
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 43
passage with future generations. In this he asserts that during an
interview with Camden he told him that the passage was suspected,
and asked him ' to give some satisfaction.' To which at first Camden
answered that, ' Peradventure he had done so already,' and ' it might
be he would do it more fully hereafter.' He continues : —
* But when I pressed him further to declare himself, whether or noe
he inserted that place upon any other man's credit, or had found it in
any authenticall copy, manuscript or other, 1 caused (said he) the whole
entire History of Asserius (which I published) to be transcribed out of a
manuscript copie which I had then in my hands wherein that place now
questioned was extant and in the very same forme as there I found it
• and in none other; marry it seemed that the copie was not verie
antiente : and when I demanded of him how antient he thought the
copie was, he answered, that he took it to be written about King
Richard the second his time.'
The memorandum, as given by Twyne, breaks off abruptly, for
after saying that he told Camden that —
' Some give out as though there was never any such copie at all to
be seen, and as though he, who I hear was owner of that copie, had
been also the author thereof (especially of that place now questioned)
namely one Mr. Henry Savile of the Banke1.
Twyne ends with an &c, instead of giving Camden's reply to this
question as to the circumstances of the ' copy ' having been sent to
Camden by ' Long Harry Savile, the antiquary,' as Wood says he
was called, but known to literature as Sir Henry Savile, and to Oxford
as a Warden of Merton College. The evidence, however, on this
part of the business is not clear. In all probability Savile composed
it2, and sent it to Camden, who inserted it in his Britannia at the
same time as he inserted a passage which he had found in the Hyde
Abbey Chronicle somewhat to the same effect. The story which
Twyne gives3 of Savile having such a MS. of Asser, and lending it to
a certain Netelton, and Netelton losing it, will not bear examination,
for the circumstantial evidence he adduces is not consistent.
Without going into more details, and adducing the arguments of
other writers, it may be useful to sum up the evidence4.
1 Printed in Antony a Wood {Annals, ed. Gutch, 1792, vol. i. p. 22), from a copy
attested to agree with the original by ' Thomas Hyde, A.M. Protobibliothecarius
Bodleianus.'
2 Antony a Wood {Annals, ed. Gutch, 1792, vol. i. p. 24) mentions that he was sus-
pected of forging a passage in the edition of Ingulph which he printed, and in which he
makes the Abbot first study at Westminster, then at Oxford where he read Cicero (!).
This would be in 105 1. The Ingulph question is a very difficult one, all the MSS.
being late. See Riley's article, Archaeological Journal, 1862, vol. xix. p. 43.
3 Bryan Twyne, Apologia, p. 144.
* In the Monumenta Britannica certain details will be found in the General Intro-
44 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
It is certain that there was an ancient, if not contemporary, copy of
the life of Alfred by Asser existing amongst the Cottonian MSS. before
the fire. The .MS. itself was certainly written some time before noo,
probably ioo years before, possibly a contemporary MS. It is certain
it had not Camden's passage. Some three or four MSS. of Asser are
found mentioned or exist, but they are only sixteenth and seventeenth
century copies, and appear all to have been taken directly or indirectly
from the Cottonian copy. Not one of them has the Camden
passage.
Next, while Camden states in his preface to his Frankfort edition,
printed in 1603, that he followed Archbishop Parker's edition (and
it is clear that he does so, for it includes certain spurious passages
which the Archbishop had inserted, and adopts exactly the same text),
he could not possibly have used another IMS., for the only variation
is the insertion of the Camden passage. That passage had been sent
to him before 1600, when he reprinted his Britannia, and he inserted it
with another passage from the Hyde Abbey Chronicle, both passages
appearing in print for the first time, and both together under Oxford.
In adopting them, the latter was said to be ' ex optimo MS. exemplari/
When the passage was transferred and inserted at the end of one of
the yearly entries in his edition of Asser, neither in the preface is
a word said in modification of the statement that Archbishop Parker's
text is followed, nor is any note added in the body of the work. In
other words, it is inserted surreptitiously. Though there were questions
raised, and the matter discussed, though Archbishop Parker was
charged with suppressing the passage, Camden held his peace for
nearly twenty years, and allowed it to be reprinted and also translated
into English without saying a single word on the matter. When
within a year of his death (being 72 years of age), on the somewhat
impertinent intrusion of Bryan Twyne, and after trying to put off
giving any direct answer, he is made by Twyne to say, upon pressure,
that he printed his edition of Asser from a IMS. of the time of
Richard II., which had that passage, either then Twyne misunderstood
his answer, or he had forgotten that the book itself negatived this
story, both by his preface in it and by the internal evidence of the
printing of the book itself. The former hypothesis is the most
probable, for as the whole memorandum shows that Twyne was
intent upon what he thought to be a great work, namely, to gain
a point in the argument for the antiquity of Oxford, rather than arrive
duction, p. 1 1 and p. 79, and in the work itself, p. 467. Also in Hardy's Catalogue,
Rolls Series, 1862, vol. i. p. 552, for some of the chief evidences on the subject.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 45
at the truth, he was not in a position to report accurately what he
heard on the subject.
It must, however, be borne in mind that it would be wrong to
judge of accuracy of statement in writers in those days by the standard
which we set in our own. Even Archbishop Parker's preface to his
edition of Asser will not bear close examination, for he speaks strongly
of following his copy, and lays stress upon leaving the MS. in the
College, so that his work may be judged by it, and then inserts two or
three passages from the ' annals ' of the pseudo-Asser, certainly not in
the ' archetype ' for which he expresses such reverence.
Of course, he thought these ' annals' were the genuine work of Asser,
and therefore there could be no harm in improving upon the ancient
MS. which he was following by adding them. He never thought for
one moment he was corrupting the text of a contemporary of Alfred
with the inventions of a twelfth or thirteenth century writer, or he
would not have done so. However, in his case, the insertions were
innocent ; the same cannot be said of the passage which was of so
much importance in a controversy on which many felt so keenly.
And now, having treated of the circumstances concerning its inser-
tion, we have to consider the passage itself. But it will be more con-
venient to consider the two passages together, and to give them both
as they appear in Camden's Britannia. The first is professedly from
the Hyde Abbey Chronicle; the second, as will be seen, professedly
from a MS. of Asser. He had, in his previous editions of the
Britannia, remarked that ' when the storm of the Danish war was
over, the most religious Prince Alfred restored their retreats to the
long-exiled Muses by founding three Colleges, one for grammarians,
another for philosophy, and a third for divinity.' He added, in the 4to
edition of 1600, 'This will be more fully explained by the following
passage in the annals of the New Monastery at Winchester.' He gives
the passage thus :—
1 In the year of our Lord's Incarnation 886, in the second year of the
coming of S. Grimbald into England, the University of Oxford was
begun ; the first amongst the Regents and Divinity Readers in the
same, being S. Neot, the Abbot who was also a distinguished Doctor
in Theology, and S. Grimbald, the most eminent Professor of the
exceeding sweetness of Holy Scripture. Then Asser the Priest and
Monk most skilled in all Literature, was Regent in Grammar and
Rhetoric. While John the Monk of the Church of S. David's was
Reader in Logic, Music and Arithmetic. And John the Monk, the
companion of S. Grimbald, a man of most acute intellect and most
learned in every subject was teacher in Geometry and Astronomy
46 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
And this in the presence of the most glorious and invincible King Alfred
whose memory will dwell like honey in the mouths of all,'
At this point Camden broke off, but the original passage runs on as
follows : —
'both clergy and laity throughout his whole Kingdom. Then the
most prudent King Alfred issued a decree that his nobles on account
of the liberty given them, should have their sons disciplined by learn-
ing, or if they had no sons, at least their servants should they exhibit
natural ability l.
He then proceeds in his own words : ' Soon after, as we find m an
excellent MS. of the said Asser, who was at that time Professor
here ' : —
' The same year there arose a very bad and terrible discord between
Grymbald and those very learned men whom he had brought thither
with him, and the old scholars whom he had found there ; for these,
on his coming, unanimously refused to receive the rules, methods, and
forms of lecturing which Grymbald had introduced. During three
years there had been no very great difference between them ; there
was however an enmity existing although concealed, which afterwards
broke out with the utmost violence which made it clearer than the light
itself: and when that invincible King Alfred heard of the dissensions by
the messages and complaints from Grymbald, he went in person to
Oxford to put an end to this dispute, and he took the greatest pains to
hear the causes and complaints which were adduced on both sides:
The foundation of the difference lay in this. These old scholars main-
tained that before Grymbald came to Oxford learning had everywhere
nourished, though the scholars at that time were fewer than in more
ancient times, the greater part having been driven out by the cruelty
and oppression of the Pagan [Danes]. They also proved, and shewed,
and that by the undoubted testimony of antient chronicles, that the
ordinances and regulations of the place were established by certain
religious and learned men, such as Gildas, Melkinus, Nennius, Kenti-
gern, and others, who had all lived to a good old age in these studies;
managing affairs there in peace and harmony, and also that St. Germanus
came to Oxford, and staid there half-a-year at the time he took his
journey over Britain to preach against the Pelagian heresies, and won-
derfully approved their aforesaid rules and institutions. The king with
unheard of condescension listened to both parties most attentively, and
repeatedly exhorted them by pious and seasonable advice to maintain
mutual union and concord. And so he left them with the prospect
that both parties would follow his advice and embrace his institutions.
But Grymbold who was offended at this proceeding immediately retired
to the monastery at Winchester lately founded by King Alfred, and
1 Camden's Britannia. First printed in 4to ed., London, 1600, p. 331, and
repeated in later editions. Also more fully in Liber dc Hyda. cap. xiii. § 4. Rolls
Series, 1866, p. 41. The passage in the Hyde Chronicle immediately precedes that
already given, p. 13, beginning, * Which University of Oxford.' Appendix A, § 16.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 47
then also caused his tomb to be removed to Winchester, in which he
had intended that his bones should be laid when his course of life was
ended, and which was in the vault under the chancel of St. Peter's
Church at Oxford ; this church the said Grymbald had built from the
ground, of stone executed in the most perfect manner V
When this passage was inserted into the Frankfort edition of Asser
it was put under the events of the year 886 : the date being derived
from that given in the Hyde Chronicle for the foundation.
In tracing the origin of the Alfred myth, we are met by the same
kind of difficulties as have already presented themselves in respect
of the Mempric and Greeklade myths. In the case of Alfred it is most
difficult, if indeed it is possible, to arrange in order of date the several
passages in which the myth occurs, or discover exactly its first appear-
ance in any chronicle. But it may be as well at once to point out that
no writer anterior to Edward III.'s reign has been found who appears
to have known of it, for had any known it he would have most
certainly alluded to it in recording Alfred's labours in the cause of
education, which so many chroniclers before that time do.
The earliest instance observed of a reference to Alfred founding
Oxford is the passage in Ralph Higden's Polychronicon, a chronicle
beginning at the creation of the world and continued to a.d. 1357.
The compiler died in 1363, but it was continued afterwards by others.
He inserts a few words in the summary of Alfred's life at the beginning
of his sixth book, thus : —
' He put together psalms and prayers into one little book which he
called a manual, that is handbook, and carried it carefully about with him.
He attained but a very imperfect knowledge of grammar for the reason
that at that time there did not exist throughout the whole kingdom a
teacher of grammar. Wherefore by the counsel of S. Neot the Abbot,
whom he frequently visited, he was the first to establish schools for the
various arts in Oxford ; to which city he granted privileges of many
kinds. Moreover he permitted no illiterate person to be promoted to
any ecclesiastical dignity2.'
Possibly of Edward Ill's time also is Brompton's Chronicle, or as it
may be more correctly called, the Chronicon Jornallense, and it has the
passage about Oxford almost in the same words as Higden's Polychroni-
con, but with additions similar to those in the Hyde Chronicle ; thus : —
1 Camden's Britannia. First printed in 4to ed., London, 1600, p. 331, and re-
peated in later editions. Also in the English translations of the Britannia, from one
of which, i.e. Gough's folio ed., London, 1789, p. 287, the English versions given
above are taken, though with some slight variations, where it seemed necessary, to
bring them more closely into accordance with the original. Appendix A, § 17.
2 Higden's Polychronicon, Rolls Series, 1883, vol. vi. p. 354. Appendix A, § 18.
4>S THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
' He put together psalms and prayers into one little book, which he
carefully carried about with him, he attained but a very imperfect
knowledge of grammar, because then in the whole western kingdom
no teacher of grammar existed. For this reason by the counsel of
S. Neot the Abbot, whom he often visited, he first of all established
public schools of the various arts at Oxford which he caused to have
many privileges; Wherefore also this king who was himself a giver of
Alms, a hearer of Mass, and an enquirer into hidden things, summoned
to him from a certain part of Gaul, the holy Grimbald, a monk skilled
in literature, and in song; also John a monk of S. David's situated in
the farthest part of Wales, that he might gain a knowledge of literature
from them. He also so encouraged his nobles to take up literature
that they should have their sons taught, and if they had none, then
their servants1.'
A page or so further on, where he is writing of Alfred dividing his
money, he says, ' of the second half, which was divided into four
portions, the first was for tbe poor, the second for founding monas-
teries, the third for scholars recently assembled at Oxford, the fourth
for restoring churches.
Thirdly, we have the Hyde Abbey Chronicle, from which the extract
has already been given as quoted by Camden.
There is, next, a passage quoted by Bryan Twyne2 and by Wood3 as
the writing of William of Malmesbury, whose histories were written about
1 120-25. But they contain nothing of the kind. The passage is stated
by the latter to occur in his treatise De Anti quit ate Glastoniensis eccfesiae*.
Of this, though in its original shape it was written by William of Malmes-
bury, no early copy is known to exist, and the MSS. which do exist are
obviously filled with later interpolations. But further no IMS. has been
observed to contain the passage earlier than that of John of Glastonbury,
who though he copies a great deal from William of Malmesbury, inter-
polates more, and brings his chronicle down to 1456. He may however
have copied a somewhat earlier MS. The passage runs as follows : —
* Hearing of the fame of Neot, King Alfred often visited the servant
of God, and was sometimes guided by his counsels. For by the coun-
sel of Neot he first appointed public schools of the various arts at
Oxford, and sent legates to Rome beseeching Martin the second that
he would grant to the English schools the same liberties as they have
at Rome, and what he asked of the most Holy Father without any delay
he obtained and procured for them, privileges in many matters.'
1 Brompton, Chronicon Jornallense apud Twisden Decent. Scriptores. London,
1652, col. 815. Appendix A, § 19.
a Twyne, Apologia, p. 1S6. 3 Wood, Hist. &" Ant. Oxon, p. 43.
4 In Ilcarne s edition of William of Malmesbury, De Anliquitatibus Ecclesiae de
Glastonia, there is no trace of the passage. It is included, however, in his edition
of John of Glastonbury, Oxon., 1726, p. in.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 49
To these may be added an extract from the Historia Major, written by
Thomas Rudborn, at Winchester, about the year 1440. He must have
had knowledge of the Hyde annals, but does not seem to have followed
them. He writes : —
' This noble King divided the kingdoms, which formerly existed in
England into Counties ; and in order that the Christian faith should
always increase, blossoming in flowers of piety, he founded the Univer-
sity of Oxford V
A little before this passage he has : —
' Alfred had a son Ethelward, a very learned man, and a philosopher
at the University of Oxford. And he was buried in the new Minster
at Winchester which is now called Hyde.'
In another place he has written : —
' He (Alfred) discovering a certain herdsman (subulcum) by name
Denewlph, sent him to the schools; and he was afterwards made
Doctor of Theology at Oxford, and was appointed to be Bishop of
Winchester by King Alfred himself2.'
Taking, then, these earlier forms of the myth as it is first presented to
us, it would seem that the chief point in common is that Alfred founded
schools at Oxford. But this is a natural deduction which any historian
of the fourteenth century would make. He would have read in Florence
of Worcester and others who had copied Asser, that Alfred encouraged
education, and founded a school or schools ; Oxford was the chief
school known to him, and as he had no record of its foundation, it
would be natural for him to put the two together. Each chronicler,
however, varies the story.
At the end of the fifteenth century Rous treats this myth much as
he has treated the myths which relate to the primeval founding of
Oxford. He seems to have followed Asser in part, the Hyde Chron-
icle in part, and to have added something of his own. It will be well
to give his account, as it forms a link in the growth of the myth ; and
his transference of the record of the purchases of three halls by the
University in 1253, 1262, and 1270, to King Alfred's time, provided
the basis, no doubt, for Camden's statement in his Britannia of there
having been three Colleges founded by Alfred in Oxford.
1 Thomae Rudborne Historia Major Wintotiiensis, cap. vi. Printed in Wharton's
Anglia Sacra, London, 1691, p. 207. There are some difficulties about his date;
as, according to Wharton, there were two Rudborns. This one seems to have
been Archdeacon and to have died in 1442. By more than one of the controver-
sialists the passage from the Hyde Abbey Chronicle is attributed to Rudborn, pro-
bably from it having been copied into some one of the many Winchester Chronicles.
2 Ibid., p. 208. W. of Malmesbury tells the story, but without any reference to
Oxford. The three passages are given Appendix A, § 20.
E
50 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Rous treats the story thus : —
1 This King [Alfred] delighted in the society of learned men, whom he
knew to lead virtuous lives, and so summoned Plegmund Abp. of Canter-
bury, Werferth of Worcester before he was made Bishop, and Athelstan
of Hereford, and Werulf of Leicester, all learned men from the king-
dom of the Mercians. Also he joined with them the holy Grymbald
of Flanders from the Monastery of S. Bcrtin,with his companions, John
and Asser and John the Welshman from the Monastery of S. David's.
And through their teaching he obtained knowledge of all books. At
that time there were no grammarians throughout the kingdom of the
West Saxons. He amongst the praiseworthy acts of his munificence,
in the year 873 at the instigation of S. Neot established public schools
for the several arts in Oxford ; to which city on account of his special
love for the scholars he granted many privileges, not allowing any one
who was illiterate to be promoted to any dignity. The masters and
scholars, who had been converted to the faith taught in the Monas-
teries and in other places set apart according to the manner of the
ancient schools of Greklade, Lechlade, Stamford, Caerleon, Cambridge
and Bellisitum, and of such other schools {studio) of this kind as were
already in the island
' At the first foundation of this University this noble King Alfred
established at his own expense within the city of Oxford three Doctors,
namely in Grammar, in the Arts, and in Theology, in three different
places in the name of the Holy Trinity. In one of these which was
situated in High Street (in alto Vico) towards the East gate he
endowed the hall with all that was necessary for twenty-six gramma-
rians ; and because of its inferiority in knowledge, he ordered it to be
called " Parva Aula Universitatis ;" and so it was called in my own
time. Towards the northern walls of the city in what is now called
Vicus Scbolarum he founded another Hall with abundance of means
necessary for twenty six Logicians or Philosophers, and this he ordered
to be called " Aula Minor Uni'versitatis" The third Hall which he
founded in High Street, near East gate and close to the first on the
west side he called [Aula Magna] and arranged for twenty-six Theo-
logians who should promote the study of Holy Scripture, and for this
he provided abundant means to meet their costs.
' Besides these there grew up in a short time many other Halls of the
different faculties, established by the burgesses of the city and of the
neighbourhood and then by those from a distance ; yet not at the
King's expense, but through the King's gracious example V
He then quotes the passage about the king requiring his nobles to
have their sons educated, and adds that the king sent his own son
Athelward to study at Oxford: then referring to Radburn2 he gives
1 Joannis Rossi Historia Region Angliae, Hearne's ed., 1 745, p. 76. Appendix A,
§ 21.
2 lie thus spells Rudborn, but which of the \\ inchester Chronicles he used has
not been ascertained.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 51
some particulars about Grymbald, and makes him the first Chancellor.
After some remarks on the connection between the Oxford and the
Paris University, he ends with saying that Grymbald in his old age
left the University and returned to Winchester, where, having erected
New Minster, he was the first Abbot of the place, and died on the 8th
ides of July, a.d. 903, in the eighty-seventh year of his age1.
This last paragraph probably gave the hint to Savile, or whoever
was the author of the Camden passage, to insert the detail about
Grymbald having before he left Oxford built a church with a tomb in
it, namely, St. Peter's-in-the-East ; the existence of this early crypt,
which, before architecture was studied, and various styles observed and
ascribed to various dates, being thought to provide exactly the kind of
evidence which was required to prove the truth of the assertion.
But the chief point in which the Camden passage differs from all
others is that it has for its object to prove that Alfred did not found the
University, which nearly all the stories connecting Alfred with Oxford
had implied, but that he restored a previous foundation. It was ne-
cessary, therefore, to use Grymbald for the purpose of creating a schism,
by introducing new rules and regulations, and thus prove the existence
of former rules and so a former University ; and it was supposed to fit
in well with this to suggest that he deserted Oxford and went to Win-
chester, in consequence of his new rules not being received.
It would occupy too much space to introduce the various chronicles
and chroniclers who, down to the year 1603, follow more or less the
myth of Alfred founding the University, but it may be said they show
that the writers were unacquainted with the essential feature of the
Camden passage, which claims to be a part of the original chronicle of
all. It is also unnecessary to point out several chronological difficulties
which occur in the different versions, both as regards the date assigned
for the foundation and Alfred's movements, and also the known dates
of the professors whom he is supposed to have summoned. There is
also the difficulty of Oxford being out of his kingdom, so far that he
does not appear (and his will exists) to have owned any property on
the north of the Thames, while from one end of Wessex to the other
his manors and vills are very numerous; nor was it till some years
after his death, i.e. in 912, that Edward the Elder obtained possession
of Oxford, which could not well have been the case if it had been his
1 This Rous would find in the Hyde Abbey Chronicle. See Ed. Rolls Series, p. 83.
The chronology of the Camden interpolation, it should be noted, will not agree
with the Hyde Chronicle, inasmuch as it was not till the last year of his reign (i. e.
900) that Alfred proposed to Grymbald to found the New Minster at Winchester.
See Ibid. p. 51.
E 2
52 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
father's. All such are of little moment beside the one great fact,
namely that Asser, who was Alfred's contemporary, and has written
a very full biography of him, knew nothing of the foundation, nor did
any of the many writers who followed Asser1, until Edward Ill's
time: the myth then suddenly springs into existence and grows; and
then in Elizabeth's reign, when the negative evidence of Asser's
biography was found too strong for the myth, those who were
interested in its vitality interpolated the passage in that biography,
which, in consequence, instead of threatening the life of the myth,
would add fresh vigour to it.
The Camden passage is not the only imposture connected with the
Alfred myth. The association of this king with University College,
and the practical use made of such association in a law-suit, is quite as
remarkable, and though the foundation of the College and the suit in
question belong respectively to the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,
a brief outline of the events of the foundation are rendered necessary,
in order to show the baseless character of the plea ; and a summary
of the case must be added in order to give an idea of the credulity of
those concerned.
University College justly claims to represent the earliest foundation
provided for scholastic purposes in Oxford. Before the year 1250
there were students and schools here, but the scholars were almost
entirely supported by monasteries, or, perhaps, in some few instances,
by private persons. In 1249 William, Archdeacon of Durham, died,
and left 310 marks in trust to the University to purchase houses, the
rental of which should go to support a certain number of masters.
This is the first endowment of the kind of which we have any record.
The University only partially fulfilled its trust (as we learn by an
inquisition taken in 1271), by buying some three or four houses, but
eventually the masters admitted to the benefits of the foundation were
incorporated, according to the plan which was laid down by Walter de
Merton about 1274, and so the foundation became a college, though
the original title, ' The Hall of the University,' was retained for long after.
Under the bequest the University had first bought, c. 1253, a house
in School Street, the site now absorbed in Brasenose College. The
next a house, the site of which is in High Street, but on the north side
and opposite the College. The third purchase in 1262 was a house
in School Street adjoining the first purchase, and the site also absorbed
1 Florence of Worcester, writing before 11 20, copies nearly the whole of Asser in
substance. The passage succeeding the interpolation runs on immediately after
that preceding it, and as Florence copies nearly verbatim, it is impossible the
passage could have been in the MSS. known in his day.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 53
by Brasenose College. The fourth was in 1270, for two houses on the
south side of High Street to the east of the present college. These
together produced only 18 marks per annum, as we find by the inquisition
attached to the statutes granted to the masters in 1280, from which year
we may perhaps date their incorporation. In 1292, when they have
a second body of statutes more complete than the first, and proper
provision made for their Bursar, though they do not appear yet to have
bought further property, it looks as if the University had been able to
pay over the money, which, instead of having invested in houses, they
would seem, contrary to the spirit of their trust, to have lent. It was
not till Edward II. 's reign that the masters seem to have purchased
more houses and had others given to them, and some of these formed
together what afterwards became their College in High Street. But
what is to be noted is that throughout all these documents, and indeed
throughout all those which exist up to Richard Il.'s reign, Alfred's
name is never mentioned, nor a single word which can be in any way
made to imply that there was an older foundation than that of William
of Durham.
It is not necessary to discuss which of these houses formed their
first abode, or whether they let the houses and lived in lodgings till
they moved into High Street, but it should be noted that in the course of
their deeds we find the ' Parva Aula Universitatis' mentioned in 1379,
and afterwards the ' Magna Aula Universitatis ' in 1381. As will have
been observed \ Rous goes into details, ingeniously fitting the three
faculties to the three halls, which he makes by transferring William of
Durham's foundations to Alfred, but being puzzled for a name for the
third hall, invents the name of i Aula Minor.' All this manufacture is
very poor work, but by this importation of extraneous matter by succes-
sive writers it is that a myth obtains a substance, and so gains a cre-
dence, which, if left in its original shape, would not be accorded to it.
The story of Alfred's foundation of University College had probably
obtained a footing towards the close of Edward's reign, as it was
turned to good purposes in the next. The circumstances were briefly
these: In 1307 (1st of Edward II.) John Goldsmith bequeathed to
Philip Gonwardby, and Joan, his wife, a small tenement with
messuages adjoining in All Saints parish. In 1363 (37th of
Edward III.) the College obtained this, as appears by the ' Final
Concord,' on payment of £40. But, not content with this, later on in
the same year (according to another ' Final Concord '), by the pay-
ment of 100 silver marks, they obtained all the estate of the said
1 See ante, p. 50.
54 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Philip and Joan, consisting of six messuages, nine shops, fourteen
acres of land, and fifteen acres of meadow, besides certain rents, and
some land on the Berkshire side of the river. It appears to have been
what would be called a good stroke of business on the part of the two
masters who represented the college, and probably, therefore, done
rather hurriedly, and without sufficient examination of the title. After
they had been fourteen years, however, in possession (i.e. Ap. 12, 1377),
a certain Edmund Francis and Idonea, his wife, challenged the right
of the college to the estate, for it seems that John Goldsmith had, by
a later document, made a like settlement upon them. The case
appears a complicated one, and it would be rash to attempt to decide
upon the rights of it. It was tried at Westminster in 1378. Then,
under a special provision insisted on by the college, it was transferred
to Oxford, where, it seems, they obtained a verdict in their favour, but
by an informality as to the admission of one of the attorneys, an
appeal was entered, and the case went back to Westminster, the writ
of error being dated July 12, 1378. The suit was dragging on, as such
suits did, when we find that the college, being, as it were, in extremis,
decided upon putting in as a plea the myth about Alfred, and declaring
the college to be a royal foundation, though not a single scrap of evi-
dence to this effect existed in their archives, and though every piece of
evidence which did exist pointed to William of Durham as their founder.
The document in which this was clone is known as the French
Petition. It is not dated, but it is filed amongst the papers which
belonged to the Parliament, which began April 25, 1379. The
following is an extract from the Petition in English, the original
being in the court French of that day1 : —
1 To their most Excellent and most dread and most Sovereign Lord
the King, and to his most Sage Council, Shew his poor orators, the
Master and Scholars of his College, called Mickle University Hall in
Oxenford, which College was first founded by your noble Progenitor,
King Alfred (whom God assoil) for the maintenance of twenty-six
Divines for ever.
' That whereas one Edmond Francis, Citizen of London, hath
in regard of his great Power, commenced a Suit in the King's Bench
against some of the Tenants of the said Master and Scholars, for
certain Lands and tenements with which the college was endowed, and
from time to time endeavour to destroy and utterly disinherit your
said College, of the rest of its Endowment, ....
1 According to Antony a Wood, a copy of this on parchment was existing in the
College Treasury, which he saw {Co/Icgcs a>id Halls, cd. Gutch, Oxford, 1786,
p. 87). The original is filed amongst the Petitions 2 Ric. II, in the Public Record
Office.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. SS
1 That it may please your most Sovereign and gracious Lord and King,
since you are our true Founder and Advocate, to make the aforesaid
parties appear before your their most Sage Council, to show in evidences
upon the rights of the aforesaid matter, so that on account of the
poverty of your said orators your said College be not disinherited,
having regard, most gracious Lord, that the noble Saints, John of
Beverley, Bede, and Richard Armacan, and many other famous Doctors
and Clerks were formerly Scholars in your said College, and commenced
Divines therein. And this for God's sake, and as a deed of Charity1/
It seems that the plea commended itself to the council, who, on the
part of the king, virtually accepted the office of patron, and, moreover,
of founder, and all that wras involved in his being accounted such ;
and further, that in consequence the proceedings of the courts were
stayed; for amongst the documents a writ is found in 1381, directed
to the Sheriff, Mayor, Bailiffs, &c., of Oxford, setting forth : —
* That the King was moved at the desire of the Masters and Scholars
of the College, commonly called Mickel University Hall, which is of
the foundation of our Progenitors sometimes Kings of England, and of
our patronage. Now we being willing to assist the said Masters and
Scholars as far as by law we can, we desire and command you, &c.2'
This meant, of course, throwing the matter into the King's hands
and removing the whole case to the decision of the Privy Council. It
certainly looks as if the College had a bad case, and were aware of it,
or they would not have resorted to so dangerous a course, as risking
their liberties for a mere pecuniary advantage.
Still later on, for some reason not clear, another petition was ad-
dressed to Parliament, and this like the last is preserved amongst the
Parliamentary documents in the Record Office, but under those of the
Parliament which began April 29, 1384. It is again in the name of
the ' King's poor orators, the master and scholars of University Hall,
which is of the patronage of their dread lord and founded by his noble
progenitors V
Although it is not, as a rule, thought necessary to stop to point out
the absurdities in the attempts to sustain the myths, in this case it is
curious to note to what a low ebb the historical knowledge of the
Fellows had fallen when they propound that in their College, which
1 Record Office Parliamentary Petition, No. 6329. Note also Rotuli Parliamen-
tonim, vol. iii. 69 a.
2 Given in Smith's Annals of University College, Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1728? P- IIQ-
From the same work the above summary of facts, so far as they depend on docu-
ments preserved amongst the College Archives, are derived, since Smith had access
to them, and seems to have made good use of them. Antony a Wood also refers
to several of the same documents.
3 Parliamentary Petition, No. 6330.
56 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
was founded by King Alfred, who came to the throne in 872, amongst
the scholars were to be reckoned John of Beverly, whom they ought to
have known was Archbishop of York in a.d. 7051, and Beda, who died
a.m. 735. Their poverty of invention, too, is shown by their finding
no other name to couple with the above than Richard of Armagh2.
The device was successful for a time. Writs of supersedeas were
issued, the previous decisions were reversed, and all arrears were
ordered to be paid to the College from the time of passing what was
termed ' an erroneous judgment.' There are several writs and docu-
ments to this effect. One dated July 12th, another July 30th, and a
third August 2nd, all in the same year, i.e. 1388 (12 Ric. II.), an
extract from the last of which will show the results of the action of the
College : —
1 And now we understand that the said Edmund and Idonia ....
intend to implead, weary, and disquiet, as they openly threaten, the
said Master and Scholars, by writs of fresh force, and other pleas and
processes, as well in their own Names, as in the names of other their
complices and encouragers; which if it should be done, it would in the
event tend as well to the disinheriting of us ; especially since that Col-
lege is of the foundation of our progenitors, and of our patronage ; as
to disinheriting of the said Master and Fellows, and the overthrow of
the said Judgment given in our Chancery, by the authority of Parlia-
ment as aforesaid. And because we have had full deliberation in our
present Council now held at Oxon, we will not, as we ought not, suffer
this ; nor that these things that are discussed in Parliament, or before
our Council, or in other our great Courts ; especially by authority of
Parliament, are still in discussion, should be pleaded, or any way
treated of: We, by the advice and assent of our said Council, com-
mand, and firmly enjoin you, that if any assize of Errour, or any other
plea or Process, be before you against the foresaid Master and Scholars,
or tenants of their tenements, by the said Edmund and Idonia in their
own names, or of others concerning the foresaid tenements, begun, or
to be begun, you put an end to them : saying to the foresaid Edmund
and Idonia, or other prosecutors, that they should prosecute before
our Council if they think expedient ; where we will cause a completion
of speedy Justice to be made to them. Dated at Oxon, the 2nd of
August, in the 12th year of our Reign, A°. 1388, per Concilium3.'
The history of University College not being before us, but only the
myth, it is not necessary to pursue the matter further, but there are two
remarks which may perhaps be made in connection with the case. It
1 See Beda, bk. v. caps. 2, 3, and 6.
2 No doubt this is the Richard, Archbishop of Armagh, who was consecrated
Archbishop in j 347, and had been a member of the College for a short time. He
was Chancellor of the University about the year 1333, and died 1366.
; From Smith's Annals, p. 134.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 57
is evident the College had no scruples, for in the archives are still
existing several forged charters relating to this property, and, it would
appear, they had tried these first, and, as seems most likely, their
clumsiness had led to their detection. No chance, therefore, remained
but to resort to this myth of Alfred. Further, it should be added, that
this decision of the Privy Council, being one of policy rather than law, in
order to enhance the authority of the Crown than to do justice, brought
with it its own condemnation. The losing side had thought, by invoking
the aid of the Crown to help them, they would gain an easy victory.
The Crown simply looked to its own advantages, and a judgment
delivered under those circumstances had no moral weight whatever.
The judges might make law, they could not make history. Though by
Twyne, Wood, Hearne, and the like, the judgment is thought to prove
that Alfred founded Oxford, no reasonable person who reads history for
the sake of truth, and not for controversial purposes, would attach the
slightest weight to it : further, it happened as might have been expected;
such a judgment was simply ignored, and the thunder of the Privy
Council had no effect; for we find in the Hilary Term, 1388-1389
the whole matter submitted to arbitration, and the courts in January,
1 389-1 390, register ' A Final Concord,' and the indentures between
the Masters of the Hall and Edmund and Idonia follow, dated respec-
tively the 3rd and 1 4th of February the same year.
Not that the myth was wholly stamped out, for in a suit with
the Abbot of Oseney, commenced in 1427, 'Richard Witton, Warden
of the Great Hall of the University,' put in the plea following : —
' That the said Great Hall is a certain ancient College, of the foun-
dation and patronage of the aforesaid King that now is, and of his
Progenitors, sometimes Kings of England ; to wit, of the foundation
of the Lord Alfred, sometime King of England, progenitor of the lord
King that now is, before time, and in the whole time, to the contrary
of which the memory of man does not exist ; for a Master and seventy
eight Scholars, viz. for 26 Grammarian Scholars, 26 Philosopher
Scholars, and 26 Theological Scholars, to be instructed, and taught to
support, maintain and sustain the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
of the holy Church, and the Laws of the Land, and the customs of the
Kingdom of England V
So much, then, for University College, and that part of the myth.
As already said, after the death of the Oxford and Cambridge
champions the struggle between the two Universities for priority of
1 Smith's Annals, p. 145. It will be found that one of the French petitions
represents the foundation to be for 24 divines, the other petition to be for 26, while
this has increased the number to 28. Appendix A, § 23.
58 77/ E EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
date of foundation found no public advocates, till Bryan Twyne in
1608 issued his Apokgia\ This work consists of some 384 pages
of closely printed matter, in 4to size, divided into three parts or books.
It is exceedingly verbose and digressive, and it is impossible to give
any idea of the work in a brief space. The first two parts consist
mainly of criticism on the arguments used by John Caius, the first
part being wholly taken up with attacks upon the Cambridge story.
The variations of the stories as told by different authors are marshalled
in order to show their absurd inconsistencies with each other and
known historical facts. He shows that the ' authorities,' for instance,
on which Caius relies for the foundation, have no idea when it happened.
The great Cambridge Black Book gives Anno Mundi 432 12, Lydgate
4348, Caius himself 3588, Nicasius Cadney 4415, Chronicon Mor-
ganense 4848, and four MS. authorities, which had been adduced 4695,
4317, 4091, 3869 respectively. This work of demolition is easy, but
when he begins the task of building up his own positions as to the
antiquity of Oxford he labours painfully. He has to explain away
similar variations in telling the stories introduced by the writers of the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, on whom he has to rely. But, on the
other hand, he adduces many new arguments which had not been
introduced before, though, as a rule, they are of the very weakest kind.
For instance, he quotes as an authority Francis Thynne for con-
necting Greeklade with the first Greek Archbishop, i.e. Archbishop
Theodore (a.d. 669), but argues that Archbishop Theodore could
have only been the restorer of schools and not their founder, because
they existed in British times (p. 116). He takes seriously Burley's
argument, already referred to, that the Greeks must have chosen
Oxford on Aristotelian principles, and carefully shows that this is not
necessarily inconsistent with their having first chosen Greeklade, and
moved hither (p. 121). He finds satisfaction in discovering amongst
the medieval halls in Oxford a Greek Hall, and, still more, an Aristotle's
well (p. 123). He deduces from certain etiquette which was observed
towards King James in 1604, when certain officials of the University
met him on his way from Woodstock on the occasion of his visit to
Oxford, an argument for the University having been once situated in
St. Giles (p. 124). His dissertations on Rydochen and Boso, and the
British name Caer, are puerile to a degree. Though for some time ' it
1 Antiquitatis Academiae Oxoniensis Apologia in trcs Libros divisa authore
Briano Twyno. 4to, Oxonii, 160S.
2 Possibly Nicholas Cantilupe, the author, gave the sequence of the figures by
way of jest.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 59
was a doubtful question,' he thinks that Isis is not derived from Ice
(i.e. glacies), but may be the British word Ouse (p. 137).
But his very far-fetched arguments as to the priority of date of
Oxford over Cambridge, derived from the mention of the place by two
German astronomers of the sixteenth century (p. 139), are not so
amusing in themselves as in their mythical after-growth. He says
(when discussing the geographical position of Oxford, or, rather,
Britain, that ' P. Appianus,' in the second part of his Cosmograpkia, in
his description of the most famous places, names three as the most
celebrated cities of Albion, viz. Canterbury, Ochenfurt, and London,
leaving out Cambridge, because it was never reckoned amongst the
famous cities of Albion. He follows this up with another instance,
namely, that ' Cyprianus Leovitius! the author of the Ephemerides, in
his index of the chief cities, omits Cambridge, but he notes Oxford.
He then goes on to discuss the polar altitude given to Oxford and to
Cambridge respectively by other writers.
The P. Appianus is meant for Peter Apian, known in Germany as
Bienewitz, an astronomer of Leipsig, who died in 15521. The
Cyprianus Leovitius is Cyprian Leowitz, a contemporary astronomer,
who died in Swabia in 15742.
If one turns to the Memorials of Oxford, in the account of the
city (p. 3) we find that, after referring to Rous carrying the city back
to 1000 years B.C., and Twyne following him, Dr. Ingram writes : —
1 But not to go so far back, there is no doubt of the comparative
importance of the place from the earliest period. Appian in his cata-
logue of British cities amongst those of eminence mentions Canterbury,
Oxford, and London. Cyprian includes it in his index of ancient
British cities. In the eighth, ninth and tenth centuries its history
becomes matter of ordinary record3.'
So myths grow even in our own day.
Twyne also manages to derive some help to his argument that
Oxford was chosen as a Bishop's See and Cambridge not (p. 141);
1 The book referred to is Cosmographia seu descriptio totius orbis. Per P.
Apianum et Gemam Friscium. Antwerp, 1529; Paris, 1551.
2 The work referred to is Ephejneridum opus ab anno 1556 usque in annum
1606. Aug. Vindob. 1557.
3 It is probable that Dr. Ingram did not take this direct from Twyne, but through
some intermediate source. Possibly it was from Sir John Peshall's edition of Wood,
who, however, by speaking of the author as Paul Appian (though his name was
Peter), ought to have prevented any confusion between the German astronomer
temp. Queen Elizabeth and the Greek historian who flourished a.d. 140 ; and
should have suggested that the other was not the St. Cyprian who was martyred
in A.D. 258. It is needless to say that neither of these writers has left behind
a list of British cities.
60 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
but it is difficult to follow him. Equally difficult, too, is the argument
relating to British coins, being said by some chronicler to have been
dug up at Abingdon (p. 142). It is here (p. 143) that he comes to
the Asser controversy, and implies that Archbishop Parker possibly
suppressed the passage, which was most likely not written till after
the Archbishop had printed his book. Then he plunges into the
question of Germanus and Gildas (p. 145), and contends that Iren
mentioned in an obscure chronicle is not Ireland, but Icen, and so
Oxford. He revels in Merlin's wild prophecy and the curious remark
of Alexander Neckam, and finds a fulfilment in the University going to
Stamford (of which, by-the-bye, he seems to accept the foundation as
given by John Harding, viz. that it was due to the British King Bladud) ;
the treatise on transmigration of learning, however, in connection with
the prophecy, occupies several pages.
During the lifetime of St. Frideswide, or certainly soon after, he
brings John of Beverley1, Beda, and Alcuin to Oxford. His argument
as to Beda is ingenious. Beda listened to Archbishop Theodore
of Canterbury, Archbishop Theodore founded Greeklade, therefore
Beda studied at Greeklade, and consequently Oxford can claim him,
and not Cambridge.
Of course much of his treatise is taken up with the Alfred contro-
versy, and the several masters whom Alfred summoned, according to
the story, which, as has been shown, first appears in the Hyde Abbey
version of the myth. He has, of course, to combat the difficulty of
Alfred being spoken of as the founder of Oxford, according to most of
his authorities, on which he relies, for bringing Alfred to Oxford at all,
and has to make out that they meant by a founder only a restorer.
The above few notes may perhaps give some idea of the manner in
which he treats the mythical history. The rest of the second book,
together with the whole of the third, treats of times after the history of
Oxford begins.
After Twyne the next important writer upon Oxford who sup-
ports the myths, is Antony a Wood. He follows in the wake of
Twyne, adding nothing of any moment, but by omission and more
1 Possibly John of Beverley was brought to Oxford simply on the ground that
others were brought, namely that being men of note or learning at this period, it
was thought that they must have been educated at Oxford. But it is curious that
we find there was once actually a John of Beverley here, for 'Joannes de Beverlao
Prior Oxoniae, et Baculaurcus Theologiae,' was one of the compromissaries at the
election of Robert Greystains by the chapter to the Bishopric of Durham in 1333.
See Historiae Dunelmensis Scriptorcs V'rcs, Surtees Soc. 1839, p 120. And for
the coincidence of the burial of John of Bury, and the election of Thomas Hatfield
on St. John of Beverley's day, see p. 137.
THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN OF OXFORD. 6l
careful language he makes his stories run more smoothly. But he is
evidently a firm believer in all Rous's inventions, and he still puts him
in the forefront of the historians of the University of Oxford.
In Hearne we have a second Twyne as regards credulity, but with-
out his learning. He takes in everything, and here and there adds
something of his own. Two examples may be given, perhaps, as char-
acteristic. The story of Mempric, it will be remembered, as told by
Geoffrey of Monmouth, and before Rous used it for engrafting on to
it the story of the foundation of Oxford, ended with his being eaten up
by wolves. Hearne finds corroborative evidence of this in Wolvercot1.
He thinks it might have been written Wolves' cot, and two pages of
dissertation about Wlfgar-coit-well, or Aristotle's well, and Walton,
where he thinks the ancient walls of the city extended, follows on as a
natural consequence. The other is this : He has found an instance
of Busney, probably only in some later and badly spelt charter, but he
thinks it substantiates the argument as to Oxford once being on the
north : —
' This place is called Buseneia in old books, and indeed, I take Busney
to be righter than Binsey. Which if it will be allowed, it will confirm
what is said in old story about Oxford's standing formerly more north-
west than it does at present .... The first part therefore of Binsey,
according to the old way of writing, must be the same with the Greek
/Sous, and the latter must be from the water2.'
Next we have Dr. Ingram, who seems to follow Twyne, Wood, or
Hearne indiscriminately, as regards the passages which he introduces
into the Memorials of Oxford, respecting the mythical history of the
town, or the story of Alfred's foundation; but he never seems for
one moment to attempt to verify the authorities, on which their state-
ments are supposed to rest, and no further evidence of his careless-
ness in this respect is needed than that just given on a previous page.
In the foregoing pages an attempt has been made to give the chief
myths in the exact words of the writers, where they first occur, with a
view as far as possible of suggesting the probable circumstances which
led to their existence. To have followed these several myths through
their variations as they appear in writers of the sixteenth century alone
would have occupied a volume. To expose all the companion myths
which have grown up since would be merely waste of time, and it has
been thought sufficient to give a few specimens only from one or two
1 Joannis Rossi Historia Oxonii, 1745. Editoris praefatio, p. vii.
2 Gulielmi Neubrigensis Historia. Notae Thomae Hearnii. Oxon., 171 9,
P. 758.
62 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
writers of eminence. It is almost impossible to take up any book which
touches on the early history of Oxford without discovering, if not the
glaring myths themselves, at least their influence, in one way or another;
and this in books of all kinds, from the great folios of the Acta
Sanctorum^ where the author of the article on St. Frideswide has filled
whole columns with a recapitulation of the myths, to the little guide-
book which is thrown away when done with. The Oxford University
C 'akndar, too, in its account of University, still has ' The College
of the Great Hall of the University is said to have been founded in
the year 872 by Alfred the Great1,' and always has had it. And it is
not long ago that, on the occasion of the imaginary one thousandth
anniversary of this foundation, those in high position in the Church and
in the State joined together in a dinner to celebrate it '-. But, as said
before, such repetitions of a myth do harm, in that they obliterate the
true history, and therefore it has been thought necessary to give several
pages to an explanation of the circumstances under which the general
reception of the myths has come about, before attempting to give any
historical account of the rise of Oxford.
1 The Oxford University Calendar for the year 1885. Oxford, at the Clarendon
Press.
2 The dinner took place in University College, June 12, 1872 (the implied date
agreeing with neither the Hyde Abbey Chronicle, nor that of Rous, &c). The
Chancellor of the Exchequer (Rt. Hon. Robert Lowe) is reported to have said
on that occasion : c I have always made it a matter of principle to believe in
King Alfred in connection with the College. I was told it was founded by
him ; I read it in the University Calendar ; and I never heard any argument
against it until I listened to the perfidious advocacy of the Dean of Westminster.'
See Guardian Newspaper, June 19, 1872.
CHAPTER III.
The Site of Oxford during the British and
Roman Settlement.
The position which Oxford occupies is one which at first sight
appears to offer great advantages for a settlement. It is situated on
the bank of the chief river of the country, and at a point where that
river is joined by a tributary which opens up a considerable district to
the north ; added to which a thick bed of gravel exists at the spot,
forming a promontory between a southern course of the Thames on
the west, and that of the Cherwell on the right, and rising at its
summit to some twenty-five feet above the meadow-land, amidst which
the many streams of the divided Thames here find their way, and this
is exceedingly suitable for dwellings. But, on the other hand, if we
consider the circumstances which in all probability attracted British
settlers, we shall find that they were wanting. For so important a
river would naturally have formed a boundary line between the
provinces into which we gather that Britain was divided, and thus
rendered the dwellers on one side or the other liable to frequent
hostile incursions.
The probability is, judging from the scant remains found of
anything betokening British occupation on the site of Oxford1, or
in its immediate vicinity, that this promontory of gravel, which lay
towards the eastern end of the southern boundary of the territory
of the Dobuni, was not populated or marked by any settlement of
importance. On the western side of the Thames, in the meadows
beneath the shadow and shelter of the Wytham hills, a few graves2,
1 The nine days' wonder of the ' British Village ' discovered on the site of the
Angel Hotel, when digging for the foundations of the New Schools, created some
stir, from the letters which appeared in the London papers. It was found to be
only hollows where gravel had been excavated for ordinary purposes. See Oxford
Times, Dec. 9th, 1876. Still, the gravel yielded pottery which might be of early
date, and some earthenware spindle-whorls. In 1874 a single urn, apparently
British, was discovered in digging foundations in Norham Gardens. Some bronze
weapons of various kinds were found on the Wolvercot side of Port-meadow in
1830 ; and a number of Paalstabs were said to have been found in Cowley Marsh in
1 88 1. All the above are in the Ashmolean Museum.
2 See Oxford Architectural and Historical Society's Proceedings, Mar. 1870,
64 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
with traces of pottery, betoken habitations possibly of British times.
Further off to the north, and on the other side of the river, at rather
more than a mile distance, and adjoining the village of Yarnton, a
considerable extent of ground has been occupied by graves1, which,
from the pottery and other circumstances, may well be thought to be
those of the British race. But the dwellers on this side would probably
have lived beneath the shelter of the hill which rises prominently
between Yarnton and Bladon, and the top of which has distinct traces
of a circular entrenched camp, not unlike many which are ascribed to
British fortification2. To the east, again, but on the other side of the
Cherwell, on Bullingdon Green, it is possible that of the many mounds
which were there visible some forty years ago, before the land was
brought under cultivation, some were burial mounds, for one certainly
has produced pottery of an early type, and with it human bones and
burnt fragments, betokening that it was something more than the
earth and sand turned out in the process of quarrying4. Although
on Shotover Hill no traces of habitation or interments have been
found, nor on the range of the Hincksey and Cumnor hills stretching
round on the south and western side of Oxford, still from time to time
flint weapons are found on the surface4, which may possibly betoken
the presence of British settlers near.
Again, there are no traces of any presence of the Romans during
the period of the Roman invasion B, in what may be called the imme-
vol. ii. p. 196. Also a brief note in the Appendix to Scientific Papers and Addresses,
by Prof. Geo. Rolleston. Oxford, 1885.
1 For the remains discovered in cutting the Witney railway line (which traverses
the south-webt corner of the field where appears to have been the cemetery), see
a paper by W. B. Dawkins in the Proceedings of the O. A. & II. S., 1862, vol. i.
p. 108, and Appendix to Papers and Addresses by Professor Rolleston. Put of the
original excavations, under the superintendence of the Rev. Vaughan Thomas, Vicar
of Yarnton, no account seems to have been preserved. The most extensive dis-
coveries of' British remains in the neighbourhood were those at Brighthampton,
8 miles S.W. of Oxford. See Archaeologia, vol. xxxvii, pp. 3U5"398- A model, &c,
is in the Ashmolean Museum.
8 Called ' Round Castle1 on the Survey Map, and referred to by Plot and Warton.
8 The writer of this found the objects in question, c. i860, in a mound at the top
of the road, on the left hand side leading up the hill, along the northern wall of
what is now the riding ground of the Military College. It would have been a
prominent object from Cowley Marsh. It should be added, a singular piece of a
bronze weapon was found at the same spot.
4 A good polished flint implement was found by Professor Phillips in the clay-
pits on Shotover Hill, May 2l8t, 1861. It is in the Ashmolean Museum. The
writer has found specimens of the small rough arrow-point type on Cumnor Hill, &c.
'•> It is just possible that the lines of some trenches, which appear some distance
in the way to Horsepath across Bullingdon, may belong to a camp ; though it
would be dangerous to rely upon such as evidence.
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. 65
diate vicinity (such as camps and the like). Nor yet of the period of
the Roman occupation, though of the latter there are very many traces
at some distance from Oxford, and in every direction.
It will be well first of all to say a few words about the Roman
roads in this part of Britain1. The two great western lines of com-
munication may be said to be drawn, as if purposely, to avoid the
immediate neighbourhood of Oxford. The chief road, which starts
due west from London and makes straight for Staines (the Pontes of
the Itinerary), to which point it is clearly marked on the Ordnance
Survey, continues its course (though here and there for some distance
it is no longer to be traced) to Silchester (Calleva), the great Roman
city of that southern province of the kingdom referred to as Britannia
Prima'1. Thence, after a few miles, it reaches Speen (Spina?), and
here bifurcates, the lower road being continued due west to Bath, the
upper road taking a north-westerly direction, straight across the Downs
to Cirencester (Corinium). In the latter part of its course, as the
Ordnance map shows, it is clearly to be traced, and goes by the name
of the Ermyne Street.
The northern road from London, namely the Watling Street, some
little distance after it has passed St. Alban's (Verula?niu?n), gives off
a branch to the west, called the Akeman Street (so called from
leading to the springs of Bath, sought after by sick people), which,
tending for some distance in a north-westerly direction, reaches
the neighbourhood of Bicester ; then crossing the sloping ground to
the south of Middleton Stoney, takes a south-westerly direction, and,
passing over the northern extremity of Blenheim Park and afterwards
tending straight through the midst of Wychwood Forest, eventually
meets the southern road at Cirencester 3.
These two western roads from London may be described as en-
1 The evidence of the roads is chiefly based on the Antonine Itinerary ; but
whether this belongs to the close of the second century, or to the third, or even to
the beginning of the fourth, cannot be determined. It is probably an imperfect
document, on the one hand, and has been interpolated, on the other.
2 We do not find this title given to the southern part of Britain except by Sextus
Rufus Festus and the Notitia utriusque Imperii, neither being before the fourth
century. The probabilities are that it was not till the end of the third century that
this division of Britain into Britannia Prima, Secunda, &c, took place. Then
Calleva was built and the road made, and soon after the Antonine Itinerary drawn
up including that road.
3 At Cirencester is an important junction of five roads. Besides the two roads
above mentioned, meeting here, another starts westward into Wales via Gloucester
(Glevum), while through it passed the great Fosse-way, uniting it directly with
Lincoln (Lindum) and the country on the north-east, and with Bath {Aquae So/is)
and the neighbouring district on the south-west.
o6 im EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
dosing , space on the map in the shape of a loaf, with London at one
I;;,;;.'...,. an,l Cirencester at the other. The site of Oxford is m the
midst and, althongh considerably north of a line drawn from end to
end, still is fonnd to be at least eight miles from the nearest po.nt at
which the northernmost of the two roads passes.
Nor is this all. When a junction road was made southward from the
Akeman Street, at the point where the old camp exists, called Alchester
£ the Aid Chester, near to Bicester), to the Thames, « was earned
direct to Dorchester, passing some three miles east of the site ot
Oxford1 In all probability this and the last road were made late
in the period of the Roman occupation, neither of them being named
n the Itinerary of Antoninus, and it would therefore be highly im-
probable that any Roman settlement of importance meanwh.le could
have taken place on or near the site of Oxford.
Any one who looks at the Ordnance Survey will be struck by the
very straight course of this line of road, which in many parts . so
apparent °as to be accurately drawn on the map by the purvey
But more details will be found in the map attached o he late
Professor Husseys account of the road*. In this account he points
! very many features in its course, most of which are now vtstble
thought Jo plain in all cases as they were m r 84c .when he
wrote the treatise. But Dr. Plot, writing m 1676, who ■ credtted the
common stories about the antiquity of Oxford, thought the road ought
to come to this city. So he writes as follows":—
. The hi?h road between Headington and Wheatley has at this distance been
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. 6 J
'If it be asked why this way twixt Wallengford * and Alcester was
laid so crooked ? it is plain, 'twas for the convenience of taking Oxford
in the way as occasion should serve. For though I could not discover
the diverticulum tending towards Oxford in the way from Wallengford,
yet in the way from Alcester it remains at some places yet plain and
evident . . . .'
He then notes certain irregular cuttings in roads, and one place
where he says paving was found; and then he brings the road to
Elsfield, and to a certain hollow way in Headington Hill (but this
cannot now be traced, and his map affords no assistance). Out of
this road, he proceeds to say that —
1 There seems also another way to have branched about the top of
the hill which passing through the grounds twixt that and Marston
lane where it is plain to be seen, by its pointing shews as if it once
passed the river above Holy-well Church straight upon St. Giles, or the
old Bellositum now Beaumont ; where about Thomas Rudburn in his
Chronicon Hydense says, anciently before its restoration by iElfred, the
University was seated " Quae Uni'versitas Oxoniae quondam (says he
having' before discoursed of its restoration by iElfred) erat extra portam
Borealem ejusdem urbis, et erat principalis ecclesia totius cleri, Ecclesia Sancti
Aegidii extra eandem portam. Which two put together perhaps may
make as much for the antiquity of this place as need be brought for it V
The desire of bringing the road to Oxford naturally led Dr. Plot to
interpret traces of old roads wherever he found them as belonging to
one continuous Roman road. Professor Hussey, in 1840, examined
carefully all that Dr. Plot had brought forward, as well as what
Warton, in his ' Specimen,' had adduced.
The argument turns chiefly upon the apparent marks of a road
(now scarcely, if at all, visible) across the lower part of the grounds
belonging to Mr. Morrell's mansion on Headington Hill, and it would
appear as if once the road which came down from Shotover Hill past
the Warneford Asylum, and now meets the main Headington road
just after it begins to rise up Headington Hill, was originally continued
across that road and joined the Marston Lane at rather more than a
quarter of a mile's distance, near to the turn to King's Mill on the left
and close by the old municipal boundary stone on the right.
1 Plot's Oxfordshire, p. 318. It must be remembered that the historian Rudburn
died early in 1442, and, as already pointed out, is of no authority. The Hyde
Abbey Chronicle, as has been said, is probably much earlier than his date. Plot,
however, suppresses the absurdity which is implied in the passage, namely, that
the University was only moved back within the walls after 1354, i.e. after the
colleges of University, Merton, Exeter, Oriel, and Queen's had been founded. He
appears to make the passage say it was moved at the restoration by King Alfred,
and this is not accurate. It is an example of how writers unscrupulously deal with
passages which, when given entire, refute themselves.
F 2
68 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
The Shotover road, ihe lower part of which, next the Headington
road -oes by the name of ' Cheyney Lane'/ was once the chief htgh-
° to LondU and if the portion of road said to be traceable through
At lorrell's grounds, and the small portion supposed to be viable
o t'sid on the left of the path going up to Joe Mien's tree, and
•us b ore it joins the Marston Road, be Roman, then the irregular
oad up Thoto cr Hill is Roman also, and in fact that was held to be so.
to the .rounds on which such a theory is based are not forthcoming,
except that Oxford, being supposed to be a Roman city, it was neces-
sary to find a Roman road to it from London.
W 1 respect to the direction of the portion of road being towa d
Holywell Church, as Professor Hussey has observed, this ,s not he
case but it is considerably above it, and is directed to the pent in he
Ch erwTll where the streams divide. He concludes some other notes
by lying, 'However, I can find no trace of it on any part of tins
gl'warton seems to have taken Plot's note, and enlarged upon it
HiT words are here quoted from his 'Specimen of a Htstory of
OXf0rtAnroethe7branch of the branches of the Akeman Street perceptibly
slant "from the brow of Shotover Hill, near Oxford, down its northern
deenvity ; bisects Marston Lane, crosses the Cherwe 1 north of Ho y-
«1 Church with a stone pavement, is there called King* Swath
I Way goes over S. Giles field and Port Meadow, has an apparent
tragus ove the Isis, now cal.ed Binsey ford, being a few yards south
of Me grove, run's through Binsey churchyard,™ which are Ae
Inatures of large buildings, winds up the hill towards the left, whe e
tod the ancient village of Seckworth, and from thence proceeds to
Gloucester, or falls into the Akeman Street about Witney .
There is a boldness in sketching this outline which for the moment
defies argument. If one inquires, ' Where are the traces r the answer
would be ' They are obliterated' ; and as regards crossmg of the streams,
U "lid be answered, either the bridges were wooden and have
per shed, or their stonework has been taken away and used for other
purpose . And there is no doubt that a road once deserted and the
ground dug over leaves few, if any, vestiges behind. It m.gh , too^ be
urged, in support of iprimdfdcit acceptance of the theory, that there
, -5.M to be called so from the chain which once went across it, probably to bar
it for to,l as a Unl^e ; but the evidence for the statement cannot be given.
P-57-
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. 6g
was in all probability some communication by road between Binsey
and the northern end of Oxford before the ' Botley Causey ' was made
passable as a carriageway, and perhaps that such communication was
over the ford. And it might even be urged that when Binsey Church
was once held in much estimation for pilgrimages, the roads about here
would be more frequented than when such pilgrimages ceased.
Yet, much as this may be true, it does not afford any argument
whatever for the imaginary long line of road supposed to start from
Alchester, and cross the northern part of Oxford, and join the Akeman
Street again, or go direct to Gloucester. It may be well also here to
quote the cautious words of Professor Hussey on this point : —
1 If the chief ford at Oxford, that from which the name was origin-
ally derived, was that by Binsey which passes out of Port meadow a
little above Medley lock, there might have been a road from Marston
lane across St. Giles's field and Port meadow to it, passing quite to
the north of the present town of Oxford. Or there might possibly
have been a road in that line to serve as a way to the holy spring at
Binsey, or to the neighbouring village of Seckworth : but these are
mere conjectures at present. If there had been any evidence of such
a road in Plot's time, it is likely that he would have noticed it V
In respect of a road west of Binsey traces really exist, though they
are no longer to be seen on the surface. It went across the meadows
in a south-westerly direction to Seckworth, or Seacourt, which lay on
the Wytham Road, and was originally made, no doubt, in consequence
of the existence of a population at Seckworth ; and since the buildings
there were destroyed (a few uneven hollows by the side of the road
being all that remains by which to identify the spot) it has become
obsolete. Beneath the fields in places the stones can be found by
probing, and in the stream stones are still to be seen where the bridge
is supposed to have crossed it. There is no reason, however, to asso-
ciate this road with the British or Roman period, although it is quite
possible that an important road in very early times skirting the southern
bank of the Thames valley crossed over the lower portion of the
northern slopes of the Wytham hill, and might well have afforded an
approach to Oxford in this direction.
As a matter of fact it is dangerous to assign any small portions of
road to any specific date, and the presence of a paved road is no
evidence as to period, when we find it going over soft meadow-land,
since it must be paved in some way to be a road at all ; while the
character of any kind of paving must depend more upon the
material available than the age at which it was constructed.
1 Hussey 's Roman Road, p. 44.
7o THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
That there were roads of some kind in times preceding the Roman
invasion, and perhaps some made during that period, may well be
allowed; and perhaps, before leaving this subject, the great Icknuld
way (in seme parts called the Ridge way) should be referred to. This
is carried along the top of the Berkshire range of hills— connected at
one end with a similar road, traceable in places across the Marl-
borough Downs ; at the other, traceable quite distinctly along the lower
ridge of the Chiltern Hills of Buckinghamshire. It is well within the
area already referred to of the leaf-like shape. Though, from the cir-
cumstance of it affording communication between the great British
fortresses along that line, the period of its construction may be rea-
sonably ascribed to British times, it may well have been used by the
Romans, and continued in use by the Saxons, as it is in use now. At
its nearest point, however, it is fully fourteen miles from the site of
Oxford. Beneath the same line of hills will be observed another road,
passing from Harwell through Wantage as far as Sparsholt, and
marked on the map as the Port-way1, which has been assigned to Roman
times, but without sufficient evidence. Further to the east a small
portion of road is marked as the Ickleton way. But in all probability
the name is but a later reading of Icknield, and has been applied
without authority to this part of a lower road on the supposition that
it was a different name. Some of the roads too in Berkshire are re-
ferred to in the boundaries given in the Saxon Charters as hen-paths,
that is, military roads, which in all probability were found to be such
when our forefathers came here and gave this name to them ; but, even
where identification is satisfactory, they seem to throw no light upon
any British or Roman occupation in the immediate vicinity of
Oxford.
When we consider the records which we possess of Roman times in
the pages of chroniclers, whose work may be depended upon, we see
how little reason there is to suppose that the district around Oxford
played any part in the history of those times. It is true Ox-
ford is situated on the Thames, and the Thames is named in con-
nection with the earliest event recorded in the history of this country,
but the place where Julius Caesar crossed that river could not at most
have been far from London. Of course there have been several
i The word 'port' is an English word signifying a town-e. g. a Port-reeve
(distinguished from the Shire-reeve, or sheriff, the Port-meadow, &c.-and probably
has in 'this case no direct connection either with the Latin porta or partus ; and I the
derivation of the word is the only reason, it is believed, why the name has been
thought to mark a Roman road.
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. yi
claims made for places marking the spot, and amongst them one
even as far west as Wallingford, though the evidence is far from
satisfactory l.
The invasion of a century or so later — namely that under Claudius
(a.d. 47) — may be said to have probably brought the Roman arms as
far as this district, if not farther. It must be remembered that we
are dependent for our narrative upon a Greek historian of the early
part of the third century, but who professes to have followed Tacitus,
whose books relating to the history of that period are lost. Several
attempts have been made to construct a story of the campaign from
the few isolated circumstances recorded; but one feature stands out
prominently; the Roman general Aulus Plautius made peace (and
a treaty is implied) with the Dobuni. Now there can be little question
that the site of Oxford was within their territory, — indeed some map-
makers make the River Cherwell for some distance the boundary line
separating them from the Catuvelauni 2 on the east, — and if so, the site
of Oxford would be at the very south-eastern corner of their territory,
and the first to be reached by any stranger coming up the Thames.
This however does not appear so natural a boundary as the river Thame
and the Chiltern hills beyond, some twelve miles to the east of Oxford.
However this may be, Ptolemy in his geography (the date may be
a.d. 120) gives only one city as belonging to the Dobounoi (or Bodouni
according to the spelling adopted in Dion Cassius), and that is
Corinium or Cirencester, a city which seems to have kept up its
importance during the Roman invasion, and up to the time of the
Roman occupation, as we have seen from the circumstances of five
important lines of road meeting at the point. An English city event-
ually grew up upon the site of the Roman city which may possibly
have included even the original Roman camp 3.
1 In the Archaeological Journal, 1866 (vol. xxiii. p. 159), in a paper by Dr. Guest,
the ' Coway stakes,' near Walton-on-Thames, are contended for. The great diffi-
culty lies in this, that in Caesar's Commentaries, while several lines are given to
each day's proceedings in Kent itself, hardly as many words are supposed to include
the whole account of a long campaign westward, and then across the Thames, and
then back.
a Catuwellani of Dion Cassius, but Catyeuchlani of Ptolemy. Identification has
been suggested between the first name and the 'fines CassivelaunV of Caesar's
Commentaries.
3 The name is, in substance, British, and is derived from the river bearing the
name of Churn or Cern, which gives a name to other places on its bank. The
first letter in both cases was sounded hard, like K, and the introduction of the
Ch in spelling the name of the river and that of places, as in Cherney, &c, was
possibly for the purpose of giving it this hard sound. The Romans, when they
7-
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Here, in all probability, where the Roman head-quarters were fixed',
all was done, that was done in the way of treaty, between the British
King and the Roman General, and it is very possible that the camp
here was the first important Roman station established, and being
practically at the head of the chief river in the kingdom, was therefore
the beginning of the subjugation of the country. And if further we
take the view that Aulus Plautius had subdued the line of British
fortresses on the Berkshire downs on his way westward, it is probable
that on his return he brought the north bank of the Thames, and so
the site of Oxford, under his control. Whether that invasion or not
was the origin of the great camp at Dorchester ', is purely a matter of
Latinised it as Corinium, must have heard it pronounced like Korn. The Saxons
must have caught the sound of Kirn to have made Ciren-eeaster. We have
softened the C in Cirencester, and, leaving out all the rest of the etymological
element, called it Cicester, whilst in Ch urn and Chcrncy we give a totally different
sound to the fust letter.
1 Another argument is sometimes adduced in favour of Cirencester being the
place of treatv, namely, that King Alfred had met with some tradition of the kind,
since in his translation of Urosius, and in one of those places where he writes his
history independently of his author, he has the following passage (a. u. c. 667) :
' When he [Caesar] had overcome them, he went into the island Britain, and
fought against the Britons, and was routed in the land which is called Kentland.
S00I1 afterwards he fought again with the Britons in Kentland, and they were
routed. Their third battle was near the river which is called Thames, near
the ford called Wallingford. After that battle the king came into his hands,
and the townspeople that were in Cirencester, and afterwards all that were in the
island.' , , . , , .,
It has been assumed that King Alfred has in some way here joineu together the
campaicm of Aulus Plautius with the two campaigns of Caesar. Oros.us is almost
silent on this third campaign, and it does not appear that Alfred was acquainted
with Dion Cassius. It is highly improbable that any local traditions connecting the
tuo places of Cirencester and Wallingford with the campaigns could have survived
more than Soo years ; nor could there have survived any British history, or Gildas,
Beda &C, would have become acquainted with it, and it would have been named.
On the whole it would appear that Alfred understands Caesar's second descent
upon Britain to have been divided into two parts : the first, the fighting in the
territory of the Cantii, the second, the march to the Thames ; and this is in accord-
ance with Orosius, i.e. 'Prime- congressu, Labienus occisus .... secundo prelio
Britannos in fugam vertit. Inde ad flumen Tamesim profectus .... Interea lrmu-
bantium firmissima civitas sese dedidit.' The chief ford in the Thames he knew of
was Wallingford, not far from the place of his birth; and the chief Roman city he
knew of was Cirencester, which was in his own dominion (Silchester had then long
been devastated), and therefore he put them down in accordance with a custom not
uncommon with makers of histories. In other words, he does not here recount the
Claudian campaign at all. It is of course worthless also as an argument, to
bring Caesar into the Oxford district. See however Guest's paper in the Archaeo-
logical Journal, vol. xxiii. p. 1 77.
a During the last few years a large portion of these fine earthworks were delibe-
rately removed by the owner of the land. See Proceedings of the Oxford Arch,
and Hist. Soc, 1870. vol. ii. p. 224.
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. J$
speculation. It was a place where nature had done much by the bend
of the river, so that there was little required from art. It would have
kept in check the great stronghold of Sinodun in case it .should have
been afterwards occupied by the Atrebatii ; it would have prevented the
incursions of the Catuvellauni — if as has been suggested they occupied
the Chiltern Hills, and the river Thame was the boundary line of
their territory ; and more than all, it would have kept the passage of the
Thames open to the Roman arms and closed against their enemies.
As to the exact locality of the chief battle of the campaign different
views may be held, and must not be here discussed }.
During the three next centuries, though Britain is frequently referred
to by the classical writers, no events seem to be capable in any way of
association with this district. The Roman arms seem to have been
directed to those border lands of the hill country of Britain, namely,
what was afterwards known as Wales and Scotland. The successor
of Aulus Plautius carries the Roman arms to the Silures in the far
west (a.d. 50), and the forts of the Nen and the Severn become his-
torical. Boadicea revolts in the far east (a.d. 61), and Verulam and
Camulodunum are particularly named. Agricola's campaign in the
far north (a.d. 81) reaches to the forts erected between the Friths of
Clyde and Forth. In the next century, Hadrian builds the second
Wall in the north (a.d. 121) and Lollius Urbicus unites Agricola's forts
by a continuous vallum (a.d. 139). The revolts of the remainder of
the century are recounted, without the name of a single place being
recorded. In the third century, when the period of occupation may
be said to commence, only political history is recorded ; and in the
record of the intrigues and assassinations of Roman governors and
generals, which universally marked the Roman rule at this period,
only one single city stands out prominently, namely, York —
where Constantine was born (a.d. 274), and where, on his father's
death (a.d. 307), he was proclaimed Emperor. In the fourth century
it is much the same, and we look in vain for names of places where
the events recorded occur. Here and there incidentally Verulam and
London are mentioned, the former especially in ecclesiastical history
in connection with the story of S. Alban. But scarcely another city in
this part of Britain — not even the great Calleva (Silchester), the central
city of the south, to which all the roads tended, nor Dorchester, finds a
single mention in any of the Roman historians and poets of this period,
1 See Dr. Guest's paper in the Archaeological Journal, 1866, vol. xxiii. p. 159,
in favour of Wallingford, and the paper in the Oxford Arch, and Hist. Soc Pro-
ceedings, 1868, vol. ii. p. 90, in favour of Dorchester.
74 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
o\ which nearly one hundred may be reckoned who mention or describe
Britain and whose works have in whole or in part come down to us1.
The chronicle, however, of the Roman occupation maybe said per-
haps to be best read in the soil, namely, in the frequency of the traces
of a Roman villa; in these the foundations were of stone, and the
hypocaust or heating apparatus, composed as a rule of layers of
Roman tiles, was constructed beneath the chief chambers, and in some
cases beneath a bath room, so that the identification cannot well be
missed ; apart from the fact that on excavating they are found almost
invariably to be accompanied by accumulations containing fragments
of Roman pottery of various descriptions, by Roman coins, and by the
oyster shells ; indeed the persistent presence of the vestiges of these
last is most remarkable.
Now the district to the north and south of Oxford seems to be as
rich as most districts in such remains, but in Oxford itself scarcely any
have been discovered2.
Dorchester, the nearest Roman city, and the southern terminus of
one of the roads already described, has been a constant quarry for
Roman remains, but only one or two tesselated pavements are known
now to exist in situ, and these are preserved simply because they are
buried It has been too a storehouse for coin collectors, but the fields
now seem to be getting somewhat exhausted3. And though with the
« Such documents as the Antonine Itinerary the geogr-phicallists of Ptolemy
and the Notitia, are of course not included; and to lists of this kind may be added
tL geography by the anonymous writer at Ravenna in the seventh century, and no
doubt base'd yupoyn earlier lists. It may suffice to say that, as regards >thse lists
out of some 300 names there is not one which can with any reason at all be
"signed to anyplace in the vicinity of Oxford nearer than the , sou ^ f °-n
road referred to above, passing through Calleva and Spinae (Silchester and
SP'The following should be noted, though hardly to be counted as exceptions
Skelton in a not! (Bullingdon H.. p. 3), says, ' I have found Roman money and
^X in the grLl-pif opposite^
S"» There were collectors in Leland's time. 'In the closes and feeldcs that lye
soul ly » he Town that now stamlcth, he found Numumata AW«»«r„», ofgold,
Sir and brass ' The Roman remains of burial found m the Vicar s garden the
'cochlea ri.; Tsnail spoons, discovered by Mr. Clut.crbuck hidden in he dykes
the British shields and other weapons in the gravel of .^e Thame. £****•
camp and since then many other remains, including flint .mplements-all these
dlxov'erie, coupled with the establishment of the Bishopne ,n the early part of
he " venh centurv, and the abbey in the twelfth century, prove the continuity of
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. 75
exception of some coins being dug up in 1 796 at Baldon1, the line of the
road northward seems to be singularly free from any traces of Roman
remains for some distance, yet when we reach the neighbourhood of
Wheatley, the traces of Roman occupation seem to be tolerably
abundant.
The possibility of there having been a camp on Bullingdon Green
has been already referred to. In 1879, a little to the south-east of
Littlemore, and during the works on the City Sewage farm close to the
Mynchery, were discovered Roman pottery works. That which was
left consisted mainly of broken or imperfect specimens. No villa was
discovered, but the skeleton of a man was found buried beneath the
debris, amidst the blackened substance from the furnaces (two of
which were seen in situ), and was thought to be one of the workmen.
As it was only half a mile off the Roman road in question, it was no
doubt a manufactory, but the very few marks on any of the pottery
were not sufficient to connect the manufactures with any period 2.
Further on, and some little distance off to the north-east, upon the
high ground, a very fine Roman villa was discovered, Oct. 31, 1845,
and the excavations being continued by the Bishop of Oxford, Dr.
Buckland, Dr. Bromet, and Mr. J. H. Parker, a very perfect hypocaust
and bath chamber above, with the bath and even the lead pipe
remaining, were discovered3. All, however, have been since destroyed,
and it is even difficult to discover the spot. The glass vessels found in
the carriage drive within the grounds of the Palace at Cuddesdon, might
be assigned to the Roman period, were it not for the objects found
with them, but at Holton, close by, a glass vase undoubtedly Roman
was found 4. In a field between Shotover and Wheatley remains of
Roman mortars are found, as if once there had been a manufactory near.
Some distance off to the west, and therefore perhaps representing
the occupation of the city from the earliest times, through those of the Roman as
well as the Saxon, down to our own.
1 Hussey, Roman Road, p. 41. The coins were, Claudius Gothicus, c. 270;
Constantine, 306-337 ; Magnentius, 350-353.
2 The Oxford Arch, and Hist. Society visited the spot, 1862 ; Proceedings,
vol. iii. p. 304. But no full account of the discovery was published by the late
Dr. Rolleston, under whose superintendence the excavations took place ; only a brief
note appears in the Appendix to the ' Remains,' Oxford, 1885.
2 See a full account, with engravings, in the Archaeological Journal (1845, vol. ii.
p. 350). The coins discovered were, Maximianus, 292-311 ; Salonina, 260 ; Con-
stantinus, 306-337; Gratianus, 375-383.
4 Arch. Journal, 1847, vol. iv. pp. 157 and 74. A hoard of coins was discovered,
560 in number, on the Shotover side of Wheatley in 1842. They were given up to
the proprietor, G. V. Drury, Esq. ; but whether an account of these exists has not
been ascertained. Ibid. iii. p. 125.
76 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the nearest point of all to Oxford where Roman remains have been
found, there were discovered at Wood-Eaton1, c. 1802, traces of what
appeared to be a Roman settlement of some extent. No outline oi a
camp can now be traced, nor are the remains sufficient to mark the
a< tual site of the villa, but Roman brick is continually turned up by the
plough, and large quantities of pottery, broken portions of armour, and
weapons, heads of spears, arrows, Roman fibulae, and a plentiful
supply of Roman coins dating back to Trajan and Nero, but the
majority much later, mark the spot as once occupied by Roman men
of wealth and influence. The position was on the rising ground
overlooking the valley of the Cherwell. Possibly on the other bank of
the Cherwell by Kidlington, there was another small station, since
Roman remains have been found in a field a little to the north-west
of the village 2.
Again, about two miles off, to the west of the road in the grounds of
Oddington Parsonage, in 1824, some interments of men with traces of
armour were found, and as the ground from this point for some dis-
tance in the direction of Charlton was strewed with debris of Roman
pottery, the remains were associated, whether rightly or wrongly, with
Roman times 8. A little way off the line of the road, to the east of
Waterperry, a considerable quantity of Roman remains were discovered
in 1845, and described by a former President of Trinity College, Dr.
Wilson4.
But still closer to the road, in the year 1862, were discovered, in
a field just above Beckley, in a south-easterly direction, the distinct re-
mains of a Roman villa. The part uncovered consisted of four cham-
bers, but the walls were carried further. Three of the chambers were
paved with tesselated pavement, but only of ordinary square patterns.
The pottery, tiles, and the other circumstances (the presence of the
oyster shells included), left no doubt of it being a typical Roman
villa, though the excavations did not lay bare any hypocaust5. A little
1 See Hussey, Roman Road, p. 37- Since that time many more Roman remains
have been collected from this neighbourhood by Arthur J. Evans, M.A, Keeper of
the Ashmolean Museum, amongst others a very interesting bronze statuette.
2 A small Roman urn of good shape, found in process of quarrying, c. i860,
is in the writer's possession.
3 Skelton's Oxfordshire, Ploughlcy Hundred, p. 7.
♦ Archaeological Journal, 1846, vol. iii. p. «6. The coins found were of Claudius
Gothicus Maximus, and Consiantine. with the addition of two earlier coins of
Domitian and Hadrian Dr. Wilson refers (p. 123) to the excavations which pro-
duced Samian ware, &c, on the hill opposite, about a mile distant. Several
specimens from these excavations are preserved in the Ashmolean Museum.
« Described, Oxford Arch, and Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 186:, New Series, vol. 1.
p. 186.
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. 77
further on, at the hamlet of Fencott1, a quantity of Roman pottery was
found. It was where the clay was admirably suited to the purpose, as
was shown by experience, it being the best in the neighbourhood, and
the manufactory must have been a formidable rival to that at Little-
more. At Alchester itself, which is a little further on, where the road
joins the Akeman street, quantities of Roman relics have been dis-
covered. From the excavations made in 1766, one spot was found to
be the site of a villa, but in several places quantities of tiles, pottery*
coins, &c, had been found 2.
But the most prolific district for Roman remains in the neighbour-
hood of Oxford, is some distance to the westward near to Stonesfield,
through which the Akeman street passes. The Roman camp lay a
little to the north of this road ; but close to it, and in the parish of
Stonesfield, there was discovered, in 171 2, a fine Roman villa with
a tesselated pavement, the account of which was published in 17 13.
Again, in 18 12, further excavations were made here, and in the same
year another Roman villa was discovered on the south bank of the Even-
lode, its situation remarkably resembling the description of Pliny's Villa;
the court, and some fifty chambers or more, surrounding it were all care-
fully traced and planned. The chief chamber with the hypocaust and
flues, are still remaining, with the greater part of a fine large tesselated
pavement in situ, and much of the foundation of the other chambers
can be traced. This is known as the Northleigh Villa; the Stones-
field Villa was unfortunately entirely obliterated 3.
1 Hussey, p. 34. One fragment is stamped with the letters Jure Uro ; but
whether this stamp has been observed on pottery found in any of the villas has not
been ascertained.
2 A MS. account of Alchester came into the hands of Dr. Kennett, written
1622, of which he prints a considerable portion (Parochial Antiquities, New Ed.,
Oxon., 1818, p. 10). The following is an extract: 'In the forefront of Allchester,
Allectus for his better defence built a sconce or watch tower . . . where in our days
has been digged up much Roman money, brick and tile, and pavement of curious
and wrought tile of the bigness of sixpence being delicately laid there.' In further
excavations in the Spring of 1766 (See Dunkin's History of Bicester, London, 18 1 6,
p. 195), they found beneath the debris a court covered with fine gravel ; then they
reached a wall, of which 3 feet was standing, which they followed for 30 feet ;
then inside the building a Roman pavement, and beneath this a Roman hypocaust.
It is needless to add that all the guesses about Alauna and Allectus arise from
interpretation of the name, Al-chester. Bertram's forgery of the Itinerary of
Richard of Cirencester was first published at Copenhagen in 1758; in this he impu-
dently turned the Old Chester into Aelia Castra, and set Stukeley and a number of
antiquaries, who followed him, disputing about the part which this city played in
the history of the Roman occupation in the third century.
3 A very good account of the Northleigh villa, with plan, section, and map,
is given in Skelton's Oxfordshire (Wootton H., pp. 9 to 15). The original drawings
were sent to the Society of Antiquaries, but there does not appear to be any notice
;8 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
If next we look at the southern side of the Thames, the evidence of
Roman occupation is scattered much in the same way, but again it
does not seem to reach to the immediate neighbourhood of Oxford.
One solitary coin, or a piece of pottery supposed to be Roman, is
occasionally picked up, but there are few districts, if any, in the
kingdom, where this is not the case. The nearest spot where any-
thing like a number of Romain remains have been found is the Frilford
cemetery, about six miles to the south-west. The Roman leaden
coffins, and in one the coins which had been lodged in the mouth
to pay' the passage (as the verdigris on the lower jaw belonging to the
perfect skeleton testified), were sufficient evidence of the occupation
here of some Roman of importance. And although the coins are
numerous, and the pottery in abundance, and here and there portions
of Roman tile, no walls of a Roman villa have been found \ But
westward, about one mile and a half, an undoubted Roman villa of some
six or eight chambers was discovered, in 1883, beneath one of which
was a somewhat unusual hypocaust, and sufficient remains of tesserae
to show that there had at one time been a fine tesselated pavement2.
About 1870 the remains of what appeared to be a Roman villa were
found about a mile and a half due west of Wantage. In 1884 another
Roman villa was discovered beneath the White Horse Hill at Wool-
stone, in which one wall, by the side of a passage paved with tesserae,
was over a hundred feet in length, and two fine tesselated pavements,
with patterns, were found to exist. Burials too had taken place within
the inhabited area 3.
of them in the Archaeologia. The Oxford Arch, and Hist. Society visited the villa
in 1872 (Proceedings, vol. iii. p. 37), and it is due to their exertions that probably
the remains have been preserved, and that it has not followed the fate of the
Stonesfield villa (see vol. ii. p. 346). With respect to this latter villa, four
drawings of the pavement as it was when discovered are preserved in the Asn-
niolean Museum, and the pavement, being one of the finest known, was engraved
as the frontispiece to one of the volumes of Pitisco's Lexicon Antiquitatum
Komanorum, Venice, 1719. There are also other engravings found in various
works Hearne also has prefixed a « Discourse concerning the Stonesfield iesse-
lated Pavement,' to the 8th volume of his edition of Leland's Itinerary, Oxford,
l7?The excavations were, by the kindness of the owner, Mr. Aldworth, first
carried on under the direction of Mr. Akerman, in 1865, and afterwards much more
vigorously and scientifically by the late Ur. Rolleston, during 1867 and 1868.
Some notices appeared in the Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, but a full
account, from the pen of Dr. Rolleston, will be found in the Archaeologia for 1870,
VOa*The Scavatiots^ere conducted under the direction of Professor Moseley and
Arthur J. Evans, Esq. The latter communicated a full account to the Ashmolean
Society in Michaelmas Term, iSS 3.
3 Visited by the Oxford Architectural and Historical Society in June 1884-
SITE OF OXFORD IN ROMAN TIMES. 79
The probability is that these represent the houses of the Roman
settlers, which were deserted when the Romans left, and were not
continued in occupation, as was the case in towns like Dorchester,
Cirencester, &c. And in some instances, the invading Northmen of
the fifth and sixth centuries might have treated what they found left
here much in the way in which they appear to have treated
Silchester.
By a survey such as this, we see that the site of Oxford, having no
traces of Roman occupation, and isolated as it were by the chief roads
ascribed to the Romans, cannot in any way be said to carry its history
back to Roman times. But its neighbourhood seems to have been
occupied, and to present numerous traces of such occupation, rather
above than below the average of the country generally ; yet at the
same time no event seems to have occurred which has caused the
district to be mentioned in the pages of the historians of those days.
CHAPTER IV.
The Site of Oxford during the Saxon Settlement
TO THE CLOSE OF THE SEVENTH CENTURY.
And now, having given some aeeount of what may be gleaned of
the Roman occupation of the Oxford district from the general aspect
of the country, from the roads, from the few records we possess, and
from the remains of habitation, we come to the period of the arrival
of the Northern hordes, and a few words perhaps may be sard with
respect to the manner in which the invasion affected the same district.
After their landing in a* 51ft the march of Cerdic and ^Cynric
and of their followers, the founders of the kingdom of the W est
Saxons, was naturally in a northerly direction. They evidently
reached the Thames, and they or rather their successors crossed _ it.
But their progress was slow. So late as a.d. 55*-^ .smore than
thirty years after their first landing-they are recorded to be fighting
at the burh of Old Sarum ; and in a.d. 556, according to the chron-
icles, at Beran-burh (i.e. the burh of Ber or Bera), probably one of
those great fortresses on the northern edge of the Wutshire downs
sull beling on the map the name of Barbury. This would place the
land of the Thames valley south of Oxford at their mercy ; and
having reached this point not only of their invasion, but it may be said
of colonisation, they would not have been long before they crossed
over to the fertile fields on the other side also. In Kent another race
from their own northern clime, held sway, and it would appear that
a Z years later, the West Saxons under Ceawlin and Cutha had by
L ming masters of the Thames River, endangered the safety of e
dwellers In Kent and its neighbouring district of Essex ; fo we find
that in A.n. 568, King iEthelbert, the Kentish king, is driven back into
Kn after fighting at Wibbandun, which must be Wimbledon m
Surrey up to which point on the east the West Saxons had in the
year 57. advanced along the line of the river Thames
The year 571 was a year of great successes, or else beneath this
vear the chronicler has gathered together the successes winch seem
finally to have completely crushed whatever British power remained
SITE OF OXFORD IN EARLY SAXON TIMES. Si
in these parts. Of the five places, namely where battles were then
fought, and the Saxons became the conquerors, two more closely
touch the immediate neighbourhood of Oxford ; and their identification
is perhaps more sure than the others, viz. the two last on the list,
Ensham and Benson. The Chronicle under the year runs thus : —
'a. 571. This year Guthwulf fought against the Bret-walas at
Bedcanford, and took four towns, Lygean-burh and iEgeles-burh and
Baenesing-tun and Egones-ham. And the same year he died V
That Egones-ham2 is the modern Ensham, cannot well be doubted.
The distance up the Thames from the site of Oxford would, allowing
for the curve, be about five miles, and it will be observed it lies, though
on the other side of the river, beneath the high ground of the Wytham
Hills, the western extremity of which, forming a sort of large knoll and
plainly visible from the road up the Cumnor Hill, would have been
a suitable place for a fortress 3, which would have to be taken before
they could expel the Britons from the Hill which they were probably
occupying. The name of the place Ensham is given to the battle by
the chronicler, because there was no other English settlement nearer
at the time he wrote his chronicle. It is much the same with Benson.
The village on the river bank bearing the Saxon name is of little or
no importance, but the range of the Chiltern Hills rising above it
afforded many places in which the Britons could defend themselves
in the neighbourhood of Nettlebed ; and the West Saxons would have
to make themselves masters of that range before they could expel the
Britons from their strongholds. Between Benson and Wytham, on the
northern bank of the Thames, there are no hills of great importance,
Shotover being the chief; but as the Britons after so many years' fight-
ing with their invaders, were not likely to have had force enough to
occupy a lesser range between the two others, we do not hear of this
hill under any name by which the capture might be recorded.
Practically we may reckon that in this year, a.d. 571, the district lying
between Benson and Ensham, the site of Oxford included, became
absolutely subject to the West Saxons.
The successes at Lygeanburh and ^Eglesburh do not concern us
so much, excepting that they show the extraordinary progress the
West Saxons were now making. As in taking Benson they had
become masters of the southern end of the Chiltern Hills, so in taking
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno. Appendix A, § 24.
2 In the earliest charters belonging to the great Abbey, afterwards established
there early in the eleventh century, the name is spelt Egnesham.
3 Although there are no actual lines of entrenchment visible, some of the
scarping may have been done with a view of repelling assault.
G
82 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Aylesbury they must have become masters of the northern end. That
Aylesbury is the place named by the chronicler to describe the victory
is probably due to the fact that it lies on the Akeman Street, which no
doubt afforded as great facilities to the Saxons in subduing the kingdom
as it had to the Romans in keeping the kingdom in subjection. Look-
ing at the extent of their victories as a whole, it would appear that by
thus obtaining this range of hills they had practically made themselves
masters of the whole of the district of the Dobuni, and threatened
the district of the Catuvellauni, and more especially so if we accept
the other victory as that of Lenborough, a name which still survives
for the high land above Buckingham1, and the occupation of which
would probably have given them command of the Ouse. If they
marched down this valley, they would reach Bedford, which, though
in no other instance spelt Bedcanford, is no doubt the place meant.
Whether they succeeded in carrying their arms so far, or whether the
Mid Angles, or any other power, barred their further progress, is not
recorded.
But while their success was first to the east of the Oxford district,
we find that six years later the Chronicle speaks with no uncertain
sound of their having taken three cities from three British kings in the
far west, namely, Gleawan-ceaster, Ciren-ceaster, and Bathan-ceaster,
as to the identification of which there can be no doubt. Without
discussing the position of one or two other places named, we see how
the whole of this district north of the Thames, stretching from the
Chiltern Hills on the east, and to the Severn on the west, was gradually
brought under the subjection of the West Saxon kings and made into
the great kingdom of Wessex ; and it gives an idea of the vastness of
the territory acquired to read, a few years later, in the Chronicle, in the
description of the accession of Ceolwulf (a.d. 597) to the West Saxon
kingdom, that he ' fought and contended incessantly against the Angles
or the Welsh, or the Picts or the Scots.'
The Oxford district was now therefore, at the close of the sixth
century, in the centre of the vast kingdom of the West Saxons ;
bounded on the south by the sea ; on the west by Wales ; on the
east by the kingdom of the East Angles, the East Saxons, and the
South Saxons ; and finally on the north by the Northumbrian kingdom.
1 It must not he overlooked that the name Lygean is used elsewhere for the river
Lee, which runs by Hertford. If we take this to be the fust part of the name, we
must look to the high ground near its source above Luton. There happens to be
Limbury still marked on the map. If this is the place it meant, they had carried
their victories up to the borders of Hertfordshire.
SITE OF OXFORD IN EARLY SAXON TIMES. 83
It was from the last-named of these probably that the first great
check was received to their arms, or earlier in their history they would
have absorbed all parts of the island; the events, however, of the
early years of the seventh century are too imperfectly recorded to set
them in exact order. Three points perhaps are noticeable in regard
to them ; first, that their King Cwichelm had attempted to destroy his
enemy Ed wine, the king of Northumbria, by assassination (a.d. 626) ;
and this implies that although he had failed to conquer him in battle,
he had carried his arms as far as Northumbria. The next is that the
Northumbrian king had entered into close alliance with the king of
Kent, and had married his daughter; so that in the south as well as in
the north, Cwichelm was threatened. But the third point, and the most
important, is that we now hear for the first time definitely of a king of
the Mercians who succeeded to the throne during this year. The
growth of this kingdom is not recorded. That it may have had its
origin in the marches (whence its name) is probable, and that there
may have been kings before Penda is possible ; but this is the date at
which the kingdom first appears in the pages of history. Failing in
the north, and attacked in the west by this Mercian king (who it would
appear had allied himself to the British king Cadwalla), Cwichelm had
to retire before this newly created foe. Under the year 628 we read
of the West Saxon king fighting at Cirencester, a strong city which, just
fifty years previously, one of his predecessors had taken, and that, in
the too laconic words of the Chronicle, ' he had there made a treaty.'
What this treaty involved is unfortunately not recorded. No religious
house had as yet been established in the west in which to chronicle
such documents ; neither could Beda learn anything of it, nor could
the compiler of the great Chronicle in Alfred's reign. But gathering
from the after- story, there is not much doubt that the Thames was the
stipulated southern boundary of Mercia, and therefore from this date
the site of Oxford, and Oxford itself, if any vill by this time was in
existence there, was in Mercian territory : it would have been for a
time at least a border town, and so subject to assault from the other
side of the river when the two kingdoms were at war with each other.
During the thirty years of the rule of Penda (a.d. 626-655) tne
Mercian kingdom seems to have had a success second only to that
of the West Saxon kingdom. It seems to have been extended into
Northumbria on the north when Saint Oswald the Northumbrian king
was slain : but whether or not during the reign of Penda the southern
boundary was extended is perhaps doubtful: certainly it was so in
the reign of Wulfhere, Penda's successor, when the Mercian kingdom
G 2
84 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
was carried across the Thames up to the Berkshire range of Hills
already referred to. The words of the Chronicle are : —
'a. 66 i. This year during Easter Cenwalh fought at Posentes-burh,
and Wulfhere the son of Penda laid the country waste as far as
iEscesdun '.'
It would appear from this that on Penda's death the West Saxon
King Cenwalh disregarded the treaty which his father Cynegils had made
at Cirencester (presuming it to have fixed the Thames as the boundary
between the two kingdoms), and attempted to gain back some, at least,
of the territory which his father had been forced to give up. He had
been encouraged by the successes which he had gained in the west
in a.d. 652 and 658 against the Welsh, obtaining victories (as would
appear) both on the River Avon and the River Parret, thereby extend-
ing his kingdom westward to the Bristol Channel ; this land hitherto
had belonged to the Britons, who had readily found in the Mendip
Hills many strongly entrenched positions difficult for the Saxons to
take. The most probable explanation of the battle of Pontesbury is,
that the West Saxon king had made use of the Severn, to effect a raid
into the Mercian territory in the neighbourhood of Shrewsbury, up to
which point it was navigable by vessels. On the other hand, the
Mercian king had retaliated by crossing the Thames. The result
however, as regards the site of Oxford, was that instead of being on
the southern border of Mercia, it was now well within the limits of
the Mercian rule. Before this any one standing on the site of Christ
Church Meadow, would look across the river into the kingdom of
Wessex, now he would look into a part of the kingdom of Mercia
extending southwards some ten or twelve miles to the hills in the
neighbourhood of Didcot, and possibly even still further.
There is much doubt as to the interpretation to be put upon the
isolated entries in the chronicles for the next forty years respecting
this district. Wulfhere, the Mercian king, apparently desirous of
obtaining a coast line, and so of providing means of communication
with the old country from which his race had come, seems to have
gained possession of a strip of border land between the South Saxons
and the West Saxons, and to have taken the Isle of Wight, which, the
Chronicle records, ' he gave to the South Saxon king, probably for
services rendered, and as a matter of policy (though the Chronicler
attributes it to the circumstance of JSthelwald the South Saxon king
being his god-son). In the last year of his reign, a.d. 675, we find
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno. Appendix A, § 25.
SITE OF OXFORD IN EARLY SAXON TIMES. 8$
Wulfhere still at war with the West Saxons; but it is impossible to
identify the place, Beadan-head, where the fight took place. Ethelred
who succeeded carried the Mercian arms successfully into Kent, and
ten years later (unless there is some error in the Chronicle) the West
Saxon King Ceadwalla does the same, as well as in the following year
(i.e. a.d. 686 and 687).
When the century turns, the probability is that the kingdoms of
Mercia and Wessex are much in the same condition as they were at
the time of Penda's death, though from incidental circumstances, which
are connected with the ecclesiastical history, it is somewhat doubtful
whether the great tract on the south of the Thames, which for con-
venience we may call the Abingdon and Wantage district was abso-
lutely in the kingdom of Mercia or in the kingdom of Wessex. The
record is so meagre, and what there is so much taken up with eccle-
siastical events — which were naturally considered to be of more
importance by the compiler of the Chronicle — that it is quite possible
there were treaties by which the under-king of the district may have
bound himself in certain points of allegiance to both the one king and
the other, and a neutral strip of territory to have been the result.
In a.d. 688 the great King Ine had succeeded to the West Saxon
kingdom; and in a.d. 704 the Mercian King had retired to become
a monk.
We have now arrived at the beginning of the eighth century, and
as this includes the foundation of St. Frideswide's Nunnery, it will be
well to pass on to another chapter.
CHAPTER V.
The Foundation of St. Frideswide's Nunnery,
a. d. 727.
Before speaking of the foundation of a nunnery in Oxford, it
seems necessary to say a few words on the ecclesiastical history of the
district and the circumstances which render the foundation of such an
institution probable at this time in this part of the kingdom. For it
will be seen that the evidence we have of the foundation is of the very
slightest description, and therefore the surrounding circumstances must
weigh considerably in the acceptance or rejection of the legend.
Xu-ustine's mission in a.d. 596, like Caesar's invasion, began and,
for all practical purposes, ended in Kent; but Birinus in a.d. 634,
like Aulus Tlautius in his conquest, occupied, to begin with, a much
larger kingdom, and his work was afterwards extended to a dominion
larger still The curious circumstance attending his mission is that,
though directed to the West-Saxon King Cynegils, whom he baptized
and though virtually the Apostle of the West-Saxon kingdom, his stool,
or seat, was fixed at Dorchester, which like Oxford was on the north
bank of the Thames, and so seemingly in the Mercian kingdom, the
kin- of which was the heathen Penda. What makes it more strange
is that the saintly Oswald of Northumbria came and stood godfather
to Cynegils at his baptism at Dorchester, a.d. 635, whom, eight years
after the heathen Penda slew. The explanation probably lies in the
circumstance of the kings of Wessex and Northumbria finding it con-
venient to meet at some border city like Dorchester, which was more
or less neutral ground ; and there is enough recorded to show that
there was an alliance between these two kings as against Penda. _
The circumstance is told so clearly and definitely in the Chronicles,
that there can be little doubt that there was a Register kept in the
church at Dorchester at this time, from which the passage has been
extracted. Royal baptisms (for two others are recorded later on) are
just such events as would be so recorded. It is not therefore as if
the district in which Oxford lay was uneventful at this epoch or
without means of record; and therefore the reason of the name of
FO UN DA TION OF S. F RIDES WIDE 'S NUNNER Y. 87
Oxford not occurring was either that it did not exist, or that no event
of importance took place there.
In a.d. 655, after the death of Penda, the Mercians embraced
Christianity — at least so runs a line in the Chronicle under this year ;
and when Wine is appointed to the Bishopric of the West Saxons,
in a.d. 660, it is doubtful whether his seat was at Dorchester or at
Winchester. Possibly, first of all, at Dorchester ; and when Wulfhere
extended the Mercian kingdom over the Thames as far as ^Escesdun,
in a.d. 661, Dorchester became so isolated that the Bishop moved
into the church which had already been built some years previously at
Winchester. And this is probably the explanation of apparent contra-
dictory statements as to his title both in Beda and in the Chronicles.
Though the Mercians became Christians, we do not find that
the kingdom of Mercia became a diocese, as was the case with
Wessex. The king seems rather to have passively admitted Chris-
tianity than actively to have supported it, and Diuma the Scot, who
appears to have been the first Mercian bishop, fixed his seat at
Repton, far away from Oxford. At first, therefore, there was no
diocese which could be said to include the site of Oxford ; but some
years later, that is about the year 680, when the Mercian kingdom
is supposed to have been separated into dioceses, at the instigation of
Archbishop Theodore, we gather from an entry in Beda \ that JEtla was
appointed to the old see of Dorchester, so that what had been once
the chief seat of the great Wessex diocese, was perhaps now a seat of
one of the Mercian dioceses, and to this Oxford would belong.
At the close, then, of the seventh century, and in the early part of the
eighth century, we find not only that the Mercian kingdom was ruled
by a Christian king, but that it had been separated into dioceses, and
Oxford was within some ten or twelve miles of the seat of one of
the bishops.
Next it should be borne in mind that we have now arrived at a
period when the foundation of nunneries was by no means un-
common in England. Beda refers frequently to the founding of these
establishments. For instance, when writing of the accession of Ear-
conbert to the kingdom of Kent, in a.d. 640, he observes that the
king had a daughter Earcongota, a virgin of great virtues, serving the
Lord in a nunnery in the region of the Franks (i. e. at Brie).
1 For at that time, there being not as yet many monasteries built in
the region of the Angles, many were wont, for the sake of monastic
1 Beda book iv. cap. 23. At the same time there are some difficulties as to the
appointment of iEtla. See Bright's Early Church History, Oxford, 1878, p. 311.
88 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
conversation, to go from Britain to the monasteries of the Franks,
or of Gaul; and they also sent their daughters to the same to be
instructed1.'
In speaking too of the community of lleruteu or Hartlepool having
been founded by a religious handmaid of Christ, Ileiu, he adds, 'who
is said to have been the first woman who took the vow and habit of
a nun in the province of the Northumbrians9. As she was consecrated
by Bishop Aidan, the date must be between a.d. 635-651. If we
take the names of the abbesses in this country mentioned by
Beda only before the year a.d. 735, we should make a fair list,
but chiefly of those in the north. One of the first in the South
was Ethelburga, the daughter of King Ethelbert of Kent, who had
received Augustine. She had married the Northumbrian king, and
on his death, returned, with Bishop Paulinus, to her own country, and
founded for herself the religious establishment at Liming about 633.
The only other nunnery recorded by Beda as founded in the south of
England, is that which Bishop Erconwald established, over which his
sister could preside, at Barking, in a.d. 677, having already founded a
monastery a few years previously at Chertsey, both being on the
Thames. As however Beda was living far away, at Jarrow, it is not
surprising that we have but few records of what was passing in these
parts. And this accounts for the fact that he does not mention
S. Frideswide, though, if the date of a.d. 727 may be relied upon for
the foundation of her nunnery, he might well have recorded it, for he
brings his history down to the year a.d. 731, and lived four years
afterwards. In the same way he docs not name the foundation of
the great monastery of Abingdon, which took place before the close
of the seventh century : and as that is so immediately in the neigh-
bourhood, it may be worth while to point out in what way this
foundation may be said to illustrate that of S. Frideswide ; for in the
Abingdon documents we have far more evidence touching on the
early history, than in the case of S. Frideswide. At the same time, there
are some difficulties in interpreting the record accurately.
One of the two chroniclers of Abingdon commences his story with
extracts from the fiction of Geoffrey of Monmouth, introducing the
names of Faganus and Diruvianus, and an etymological invention
about a certain Aben, a monk of Ireland and a hermit, based solely
upon the name of Abindon ; the writer has therefore to be followed with
1 Beda, book iii. cap. 8, Beda mentions two daughters of English kings, viz.
Sxthryd and jEthelberga who had been abbesses of this very nunnery at Brie.
Appendix A, § 26.
' Ibid, book iv. cap. 23.
FOUNDATION OF S. FRIDESWIDE'S NUNNERY. 89
caution. The other has a more succinct account ; but it appears to be
based, partially at least, upon fragments of charters, which are very
awkwardly pieced together, and he has not perhaps quite understood
them. The author of the De Abbatibus, another chronicle, has
written a connected story of the foundation, and this is evidently
based upon the charters ; but much seems to have been added which
was due to his ingenuity, if not pure invention. The charters seem
to point to the fact that King Cissa 1, who was by implication a pre-
decessor of King Ceadwalla of Wessex, granted land to Hean2 (who
is called by the title of patricius\ and to his sister Cilia (who is
referred to as the abbess in one of the charters), to build, as it would
appear, respectively a monastery and a nunnery. There are confirma-
tions of their grants by King Ceadwalla (who succeeded a.d. 685),
but a refusal by King Ine (who succeeded a.d. 688), on the ground
that Hean had not fulfilled the conditions on which the land was
granted. The most concise of the two Chronicles summarises the
matter thus : —
' Who the first founder was we have learnt from ancient records ;
namely, that Cissa, king of the West Saxons, gave a place to a certain
Hean, a man of religious life, and abbot, and similarly to his sister, for
building a monastery to the worship of Almighty God ; and at the same
time adding, of his royal favour to the grant, many benefits and posses-
sions to supply the necessaries of life to those who should live there.
Both of them were of royal race. But not long after, before he could
set about the work he had contemplated, the king died3.'
It is not necessary to go into the difficulties, or the question whether
Hean behaved well or ill, or how after five years he appears to have
been tired of the monastic life, and required his possessions back
again. What concerns us is a passage which the Chronicle introduces
to the following effect : —
'However, King Ceadwalla [685-688], on whose soul God have
mercy, not only gave the above-named possessions to Abingdon, but
also of his own free will he also granted to Cilia, the sister of the
1 No such king is mentioned in the chronicle, but the circumstances there narrated
leave it quite open that there was such an under-king. After the death of Cenwalh,
a.d. 672, the chronicle leads us to suppose that the government was in an unsatis-
factory state. He left no heir, and the Queen undertook the rule for a year. We
find also the names of Escwin, 676, and of Centwin, 685 ; Beda writes very distinctly
'Acceperunt subreguli regnum gentis et divisum inter se tenuerunt annis circiter
decern.' Liber iv. cap. 12. Ceadwalla did not succeed till 685.
2 The compiler of the treatise De Abbatibus Abbendoniae (printed from
Cottonian MS. A. XIII. in Abingdon Abbey Chron., Rolls Series vol. ii.) makes
Hean the nephew of King Cissa.
3 Abingdon Abbey Chron., Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 1, note. Appendix A, § 27.
9o THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
patrician Hean, leave to build a nunnery, in the place that is now called
Helenstowe, near the Thames, where this virgin dedicated herself to
God, and, taking the holy veil, assembled around her several nuns,
over whom she eventually became the Mother and Abbess
'After her decease, and after some time had passed, the aforesaid
nuns were moved from this place to a vill which is called Witham;
and after several years had passed, when the terrible and unheard-ot
war arose between Offa, king of the Mercians, and Cenwulf, king of
the West Saxons [a.d. 777], there was, at that time, a fortress made ,
upon the Hill of Witham, and on account of this the nuns removed
from that place, nor were permitted afterwards to return1.'
The point to be noticed is that here an under-king grants to his
niece (if we accept the author of the De A bbaiibus) land for the founda-
tion of a house of religious women in a.d. 675, and this therefore is
certainly a precedent which renders very probable the grant some
years later, also by an under-king to his daughter, and for a similar
purpose, just on the other side of the Thames. But what are we to say
to the story of the nuns leaving Abingdon and coming to Wytham ?
The later chronicler of the three expands the story2; but the substance
is the same, except that he introduces the story of the grant of a cross,
in which was inserted a portion of one of the nails from our Lord's
cross, which story may or may not be his own pious addition to the
Chronicle 3. But the departure of the nuns to Wytham cannot well be
an invention, and it is not, so to speak, required for colouring, and
the Witham, or Wittheam (as it is spelt in one case), must be the
Wytham which in the Domesday Survey is stated, with its church and
mill, to belong to Abingdon Abbey, and ' always to have done so4.'
As can readily be seen on the map it is situated on the other bank
of the little stream which forms the actual boundary of Berkshire
and Oxfordshire, near where S. Frideswide chose a spot for her
dwelling. The two churches of Wytham and Binsey are scarce two
miles apart, and the parishes adjoin. If (as appears to be the case
by the passages extracted from the later Chronicle) upon the death of
the foundress of Abingdon, which probably happened about a.d. 700,
1 Ilistoria Monasterii Abingdon, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 8. Appendix A, § 3.
2 Dc Abbatibus, p. 269.
3 Later on the Chronicle recounts the finding of the cross when Athelwold was
abbot (i.e. about 9 5 5 to 963> before he was translated to the Bishopric of \\ inchester),
and when they were making their watercourse; and that they set * up in the
monastery, 'and that it was held in great reverence to the present day. He adds,
'this is that which is called the black Cross.' In all probability the name Helen-
stowe is given to fit the legend, but this of course in no way discredits the story ot
Cilia actually founding the nunnery. w^rc
' There are also numerous references to it amongst the summaries and charters
contained in the Chron. Mon. dc Abingdon. It is usually spelt ■ Uuitham.
FO UNDA TION OF S. FRIDES WIDE 'S NUNNER Y. 9 I
the nuns moved thence to Wytham, and were there till a.d. 777,
S. Frideswide, when she went to Binsey, must have found companions
there in 727. To this story of S. Frideswide, and the evidence on
which it is based, it is now time to turn ; but so much has been said
to show an a priori reason for accepting at least the main part of
.hat story.
The material on which we have to rely for the history of the found-
ation of S. Frideswide consists, chiefly, of what professes to be a copy
of a charter, granted by King ^Ethelred in 1004 ; this only recites, first,
the fact of the previous existence of the monastery ; secondly, that of
the body of S. Frideswide reposing there ; and thirdly, that of the
books and charters of the monks, which secured to them their property,
having been lost by a fire two years previously : but some copies of this
charter are preceded by a summary of the story of foundation. Besides
this, we have certain lives of the virgin which appear to have been
written as early as the twelfth century ; but possibly copied from or
based upon others still earlier.
The following extract contains the summary of the story, and just so
much of the charter as concerns the early foundation. Perhaps the
earliest transcript of the summary and charter are found in a volume
transcribed for the use of Oseney Abbey, which, it will be remembered,
was once a formidable rival to S. Frideswide. This Cottonian MS.1
consists mainly of a cartulary, but at the beginning are the few pages
of a brief chronicle, described in the original catalogue of the library
as 'a chronicle of the English from 1066-1179.' This is followed by
a list of the Abbots of Oseney, and by the charters of the monastery
of Oseney; but the MS., like so many others of the collection, suffered
terribly in the fire of 1731, and only the central portions of the leaves
are legible. Fortunately we have other copies, for from this very
manuscript Dugdale had made a transcript before the fire, and printed
it in his Monaslicon ; and further we find fourteenth century copies of
it preserved in the larger of the two cartularies of S. Frideswide, namely
that in the possession of the Christ Church Chapter. The passage runs
as follows : —
t It is to be noted that Didanus, formerly king of Oxford, reigned
about the year of our Lord's Incarnation, 726. This King Didanus
1 In Plantas Catalogue (1802) it is described as Codex Membr. in tfo incendio
corrugatus et pene imitilis in capsula asservata. The editors of the enlarged
edition of Dugdale's Monasticon (1817) speak of it as 'but a collection of burnt
fragments *; yet with the care recently bestowed on the MSS. in the British Museum
it has been rendered accessible, each leaf having been carefully mounted so that the
central portion is generally tolerably legible.
92 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
was father of S. Frideswide, who gave to her the place which she had
desired, and caused the nun's habit to be given to her.
1 He constructed a church, and near it various buildings most
suitable to religion, as appears in the Life of the holy Virgin.
Also it appears, there, that the same Virgin peaceably obtained the
place which was then called Thorncbiric, but now Bcnseia ; for in
concealment there a fountain sprung forth in answer to her prayers,
and she cured one who was vexed of a devil, and another whose hand
had clave to an axe.
1 Some time after the glorious death of S. Frideswide, the nuns having
been taken away, Secular Canons were introduced.
'Afterwards, in the year of grace 1004, King Ethelred ordered all
the Danes of either sex then inhabiting England to be killed, and
all those who had fled thither were burnt at Oxford, together with the
Church, the Books and Ornaments, as appears from the Charter of
King Ethelred, which follows in this wise.
1 In the Year of our Lord 1004, in the 2nd indiction and in the 25th
year of my reign, according to the disposal of God's providence, I
Ethelred, ruling over the whole of Albion, have with liberty of charters
by royal authority and for the love of the Almighty, established a
certain monastery situated in the city which is called Oxoneford,
where the body of S. Frideswide reposes, and have recovered the
lands which belonged to this same monastery (arcisterio)1 of Christ
by the restoration of this new book of charters ; and for all those who
shall look upon this page, &c.2'
It is not convenient to print the rest of the charter in this place,
because the reason assigned is the attack, on S. Brice's day in 1002, by
the townspeople upon S. Frideswide's church, in which the unfortunate
Danes had taken refuge from the slaughter which King ^Ethelred had
commanded; and so its discussion belongs to a later date. But by this
attack, which involved setting fire to their place of refuge, if we are to
believe the charter, the books belonging to the church were all burnt,
and therefore we must suppose what was afterwards written was
ascertained from tradition.
1 Arcisterium. Ducange suggests that the word is a misspelling of Ascctcrium,
derived from the Greek aoKrjr-qpiov. Whenever it is used it simply means a
monastery.
2 Cotton MS. Vitellius, E. xv. (not F. 16, as originally given by Dugdale,
vol. i. p. 174 (1682) and reprinted in the edition of 1817 and 1846, vol. ii. p. 143) ;
printed in Dugdale as above. Though carefully restored and every leaf put as far
as possible in its position, it is difficult to say exactly to what part each leaf
belonged. The charter and the introduction to it occupy the recto of folio 5 of
the MS. as it is now paginated, and on the back has been transcribed a charter,
apparently of the 5th of Henry III (i.e. 1269). The transcription of the sum-
mary and charter of S. Frideswide is quite as late, if not later. Also found in the
S. Frideswide's Cartulary, preserved in Christ Church ; folio 7, but actually the
first folio of the Cartulary itself. See Appendix A, § 29.
FO UNDA TION OF S. FRJDES WIDE >S NUNNER Y. 93
We must suppose then that this charter, or an early copy of it, was in
their leger book and was thence copied at a later date by some monk
at Oseney. But we have an independent and earlier testimony to the
fact that some such charter existed in some shape in the treasury of
the church, namely William of Malmesbury. In his History of the
Kings of England, which he completed about the year 11 20, when he
is giving an account of the Danes being driven for safety into the
tower of the church, he adds, ' I have read this in writing, which is
preserved in the archives of the church, as a proof of the fact V It
will be seen, when we have to consider the circumstances of this
massacre, that William of Malmesbury is evidently referring to this
charter, though he has, in one respect, interpreted it erroneously.
But in addition to the charter there is the introduction, in which we
obtain an outline of the story of an establishment, first of a nunnery,
then of a monastery. It cannot be denied that the paragraph, taken as
a whole, is similar to such general statements in respect to original
foundation as often appear at the beginning of Cartularies ; and the
Oseney chronicler may have seen it in that of S. Frideswide, together
with the charter, exactly as he has written it. And this view would be
somewhat confirmed by the fact that the same general introduction,
beginning iNotandum est quod Didanus' appears in the existing
Cartulary, preserved at Christ Church 2. At the same time, in the earlier
copy preserved in Corpus Christi College, the introduction is absent,
and the charter is there given as if it stood alone 3.
It will be observed, in the extract preceding the charter, that there
!s a distinct reference to the ' Life of the holy virgin.' The most
important point therefore, is to ascertain as far as possible the earliest
form in which that life was written ; for it is the nature of all such
biographies to expand under the religious fervour of successive tran-
scribers : the element of historical truth thereby often becomes lost,
and we gain instead details which, though they are intended to evoke
our piety, may result only in leading us astray as to the facts.
1 William of Malmesbury, De gestis Regum Angliae, Lib. II. § 1 1 7, Engl. Hist.
Society's Ed. London 1840, vol. i. p. 279. See later on, Chapter VIII.
2 S. Frideswide's Cartulary Ch. Ch. folio 7. Though really the first folio of
the Cartulary itself, the paragraph follows the rubric, ' Here begins the Register of
Charters and Muniments of S. Frideswide.' The paragraph beginning 'After-
wards in the year of grace,' appears as a rubric to the Charter beginning ' In the
year of our Lord 1004.' The whole is repeated three times in other parts of the
Cartulary, namely in an Inspeximus of Edward I (fol. 25), of Edward III (fol. 36),
and of Richard II (fol. 45). There are slight variations in all, but not affecting
the sense. See Appendix A, § 29.
3 S. Frideswide's Cartulary, preserved in Corpus Christi College, Oxford, fol. 271.
i,4 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
William of Malmesbury, in his History of the Kings, as already
mentioned, refers to the Charter which he had seen, but in his Lives
of the Bishops, written about five years later (i.e. about 1125), he gives
an account of the foundation of S. Frideswide, which he obtained either
from documentary evidence, or, as in this case is very possible, from
hearsay. It runs as follows : —
1 There was anciently in the City of Oxford a Convent of Nuns, in
which the most holy virgin Frideswide reposes.
' She, the daughter of a king, despised marriage with a king, con-
secrating her virginity to the Lord Christ. But he, when he had set
his mind on marrying the virgin, and found all his entreaties and
blandishments of no avail, determined to make use of forcible means.
1 When Frideswide discovered this she determined upon taking
flight into the wood. But neither could her hiding-place be kept
seeret from her lover, nor was there want of courage to hinder his
following the fugitive. The virgin therefore, having heard of the
renewed passion of the young man, found her way, by the help of God,
through obscure paths, in the dead of night, into Oxford. When in the
morning her anxious lover hastened thither, the maiden, now despairing
of safety by flight, and also by reason of her weariness being unable
to proceed further, invoked the aid of God for herself, and punish-
ment upon her persecutor. And now, as he with his companions
approached the gates of the city, he suddenly became blind, struck
by the hand of heaven. And when he had admitted the fault of his
obstinacy, and Frideswide was besought by his messengers, he received
back again his sight as suddenly as he had lost it. Hence there has
arisen a dread amongst all the kings of England which has caused them
to beware of entering and abiding in that city since it is said to be
fraught with destruction, every one of the kings declining to test the
truth for himself by incurring the danger.
' In that place, therefore, this maiden, having gained the triumph of
her virginity, established a convent, and when her days were over and
her Spouse called her, she there died. In the time of King Ethelred,
however, when the Danes, being condemned to death, had taken
refuge in this monastery, etc.1 . . . '
He here summarises what he had already written in his History of
the Kings, and brings the narrative down to the appointment of Prior
Guimond, which took place probably about 1 120 ; but whether before
or after his visit to Oxford, to which he refers in his former book, is
not certain.
Besides this summary written by William of Malmesbury, which
1 William of Malmesbury, Gcsta Pontifuum, Lib. IV. § 178; Rolls Series, ed.
Hamilton. London, 8vo, 1870, p. 315. It is generally accepted that he completed
his Ilistoria Rcguin about 1 120, and his Gcsta Ponlifuum about 11 25.
FO UNDA TION OF S. FRIDES WIDE 'S NUNNER Y. 95
must be dated not later than 11 25, we have two rather complete
lives of S. Frideswide, apparently of about the same date as regards
the handwriting, but both rather later than the above date. The one
is preserved in the Cottonian Collection in the British Museum1, the
other amongst the Laudian MSS. in the Bodleian Library 2.
Without entering too much into the details respecting the life of
S. Frideswide, which these manuscripts afford, there are some points
which bear upon the general question of the amount of credit to be
assigned to the story of the foundation of S. Frideswide' s Nunnery, in
its main outline, to which some reference may well here be made.
And first of all it is to be remarked, that William of Malmes-
bury gives .no names ; secondly, that he omits many important
parts of the story which the other biographers and those who follow
them give in detail ; and thirdly, that in some particulars he tells the
story very differently 3.
As has already been said, it was not till 1122, or thereabouts, that
Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, who was then Chancellor, appointed
Guimond, the king's chaplain, to the charge of the monastery. He at
once introduced regular canons, and the monastery took a new
start — it may almost be said was refounded : and it was probably at
this time or soon after, that the lives, as we possess them, wrere
compiled.
The writer of the Cottonian MS. introduces ' Rex quidam Oxne-
fordia cut nomen erat Didanns] as being the father of S. Frideswide.
The Laudian MS. has ' subregulus quidam nomine Didanus! There
could not have been a king of Mercia of the name of Dida, but there
is nothing improbable in there being an under-king4 of some such
1 Cottonian MSS. Nero E. 1, a collection of Lives of the Saints, most of which
are written in handwriting as early as the eleventh century ; but at folio 362 another
and later hand is commenced.
2 Bodleian MS. Laud. Misc. 114 is also a collection of Lives of the Saints, written
in a twelfth-century hand throughout, and would appear to have been compiled, if
not written, about King Stephen's reign.
3 When William of Malmesbury visited Glastonbury, it is obvious he collected
what he could from hearsay when he made his history, as the word *ut fertur' shows.
We have no original MS. of that history, as we have here in the case of the account of
S. Frideswide, in the De Gcsta Pontificum, and the earliest copy is much interpolated.
But a consideration of what seems to be original matter shows that he was a careful
historiographer, rejecting what he thought improbable, but at the same time accept-
ing much which was only the talk of the several places about which he wrote at
the time he visited them. It is quite possible that he wrote a good deal of his account
of S. Frideswide from hearsay.
4 The example of an under-king in Wessex a few years previously has already
been noted.
96 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
name, though so far as has been observed no charter is extant with
such a signature. Still the name is similar to many contemporary
names, like Oba, Lulla, &c, and Dida, in the Latin form, would be
Didanus. Again, the Cottonian MS. has </ ic accepit uxorem nomine
Sefridam,' while the Laudian IMS., more fully expanding what was
originally written, has, ' Hie nuiu divino uxorem moribus sws con-
aruam Safridam nomine accepit; but neither of the names would
appear to have existed in the story as told to William of Malmesbury.
The Cottonian IMS. has the circumstance that at five years old they
handed her over < cuidam matronae Algiva nomine, ad erudiendam
Utter as! The Laudian has ' liter arum studiis erudienda tradiiur s?ib
matronem cujusdam ad modum rcligiosae discipline cui nomen Algiva!
The Cottonian tells us briefly such were her powers, ' ut infra sex
menses totnm sciret psaltcrium: The Laudian asks who would not be
astonished, < quinquenam virgunculam in quinquefere mensibus Psalmos
Davilicos, qui centum quinquaginta sunt, didicisse memoriaeque com-
mendasse>' The difference between the five or six months is of no
creat importance, but it seems to show that the original had not
defined the exact time. The few lines about her virtue and piety and
of the austerity of her living, described in the Cottonian, appear much
expanded in the Laudian MS.
The mother dies ; the father, according to the Cottonian MS., builds
a church, and has it consecrated in honour of the Holy Trinity, of the
Immaculate Virgin Mary, and of All Saints; and S. Frideswide begs
her father to give her the church. After a time she beseeches him to
let her adopt the nun's habit, and ever to praise and bless God in His
holy temple. The king is overjoyed {valde gavisus) and sends for a
holy man, 'Osgarum nomine Line olnicnsium Pont i fie ein ; he orders him
to consecrate his daughter to God, and twelve virgins of noble race are
consecrated with her. The Laudian IMS. tells the story somewhat
differently; but it has the passage so far, that the king is HnesUmabihter
cravisus! and makes him send for a bishop from the neighbouring
diocese Although the writer expands all the descriptive details more
than his rival biographer, he has not ventured upon either the name of
a diocese or the name of a bishop. Nothing however could be more
unfortunate than the guess which the first, and to all appearances
more accurate biographer, has made, for Lincoln was not the seat of
a diocese till Remigius moved his see from Dorchester thither about
AD ioqo Had he chosen almost any other diocese we should not
have suspected his interpolation, but he only knew Oxford was in the
Lincoln diocese at the time he was writing, and not being at all versed
FO UNDA TION OF S. FRIDES WIDE 'S N UNNER Y. 9 7
in ecclesiastical history he invented the name Osgar, which it is hardly
necessary to say occurs in no list of bishops whatever. Though
unfortunate for him as regards exposure of his inventive powers, it
shows to us that his addition to the story cannot be earlier than the
twelfth century, or the diocese of Dorchester would not have been
forgotten in Oxford; it is most likely of the same age as the copy
which we possess, and of which the handwriting may be assigned
to somewhere about the year 1130.
But to proceed with the story. Both her parents being dead, and
the virgin installed in her nunnery, the two writers relate substantially
in the same manner her encounter with the Devil, who appears before
her with a crowd of demons (the same words ' demonum constipatus
caterva,' occurring in each), and the answer which S. Frideswide makes
to him when he promises her all she wishes if she will worship him,
is so far the same as to appear to be the expansion of a common
original which gave some of the details.
Then we come to the great point of her legend. The Cottonian
MS. has a certain ' Rex Leicestrensium vir nefandissimus et Deo odiosus
success// in regnum post obitum Didani regis, Algar nomine! The
Laudian MS. has also the name Algar, ' Regem namque Algarum,'
but the writer has not ventured to give him a definite kingdom. Now,
since we have seen how the author of the Cottonian has used his skill
in finding the name of a diocese which did not exist till 1092, the
suggestion forces itself on our mind that he may have obtained the
name Algar from the Domesday Survey of 1087, for in it, under
Oxford, we find that the town was held by ' Comes Algar ' in the
time of Edward the Confessor1. Whether or not it was in the
original life from which both biographers copied must be an open
question ; it is quite as likely that the name having been once sug-
gested, both the first and second writers inserted it in their lives from
1 It will be noticed also that the title given is Rex Leicestrensium. Earl Algar,
it must be remembered, was the son of the famous Leofric. Henry of Huntingdon,
under the year 1057, writes: 'Lefricus quoque consul nobilissimus defunctus est. . .
Algarus vero ejus films suscepit consulatum Cestriae.' The title Rex is given prob-
ably for the sake of historical consistency and according to the knowledge which the
writer possessed. The only other examples, except two Bishops, of nobles bearing
the name of Algar (written usually ^Elfgar) are Algar, a kinsman of King Edgar,
who died a.d. 962, and was buried at Wilton, and Algar, son of Earl Alfric, whom
King Ethelred ordered to be blinded in 993. Possibly this last fact may have further
recommended the name, if not have given rise to that special element in the tradition.
For the above see Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the respective years. The state-
ment however that the Rex Leicestrensium succeeds to the kingdom of the Rex
Oxnefordiae, is sufficient to show that the names can have no historical basis.
H
c;S THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
hearsay, but the first only ventured upon the geographical detail of
his being King o( Leicester before he succeeded to Oxford.
Both the chroniclers tell this part of the story differently from what
William of Malmesbury has recorded. Of course it is just possible that
he had heard the same story as the others and remembered it so
imperfectly as to write it differently. Still, it is only a possibility, and
the variations must be noted and be taken for what they are worth in
the general chain of evidence. The Cottonian and Laudian MSS.
have first the story of the despatch of ambassadors to Frideswide.
They were to use arguments and persuasions, and if these did not
succeed, then threats and actual force. The conversations are duly
given, and in the second MS. at considerable length. When they
came to use force they were struck blind ; all the people were
astonished ; they begged of the virgin, and she prayed to God that they
should receive their sight, and they did so. They then went and told
the king. It will be observed, however, that in William of Malmesbury 's
version it is the king who is here struck blind, and the messengers
who implore the virgin to restore the king's sight. Further, all this,
which is narrated from Malmesbury and the two twelfth-century
biographers, is wanting in the ' Notandum quod Didanus ' of the
Chartulary. Such important variations rob the legend of much of
its value.
Then, to follow the story ; if we take the extract as it stands in
the copy in the Cartularies, we have an account of S. Frideswide
immediately obtaining a place at Thornbury, afterwards called Binsey;
William of Malmesbury merely says ' a wood' : but if we take it as told
by the two biographers, after the messengers had returned, and the
king was furious at what he heard, Frideswide was warned in a dream
by an angel to flee and is directed to go to the Thames, and take
with her as many of the nuns as she pleases, and then she finds, as was
told her, a boat with a young man sitting in it, who requests them to
get in. Then both MSS. agree that in the space of one hour they
arrived at a vill which is called Bentona1. The close similarity in
this respect seems to show that the name was in some earlier version
than that of the two biographers. The view that there was this earlier
version perhaps receives support from the Cottonian MS. which, after
narrating how the youth suddenly disappeared when S. Frideswide and
her companions quitted the boat at Benton, and how for fear of the
wicked king they entered into a certain wood, has a blank space left,
as if the scribe could not read the name of the wood, and left it to be
1 Cottonian MS. Bentonia, Laudian MS. /laitona.
FO UNDA TION OF S. F RIDES WIDE 'S N [INNER Y. 99
filled in afterwards, as the sentence ends, non longe a supra-dicta
villa1. In the Cottonian MS. their path leads them ' ad mansiuncidam
quam quondam fecerunt subulci custodientes greges porcorum] covered
all over with ivy. In the Laudian ' Tandem mapale conspiciunt ad
porcorum tutamen construciumj but so overgrown with ivy that no one
could see the entrance. Both agree in the hut being covered with
ivy, but in nothing else, for in one case it was the dwelling of herds-
men, in the other of the pigs. Meanwhile the king came with his
followers to Oxford, and when he began to enter he became blind.
The Laudian, in process of expansion, has ' Cumque appropinquant
portae quae ad aquilonarem duett] the former not venturing to name
which gate it was. In both the king is made to remain blind for the
rest of his life, a very different story from that of William of Malmes-
bury. Both chronicles also refer to the tradition that from that time no
king ventured to enter Oxford, which it will be observed William of
Malmesbury inserts in his account. The insertion by the latter seems
rather to show his faith in the legend, than to be based upon his
recollection of historical fact 2.
Then we have in the Cottonian MS. an account of three miracles,
all happening while sojourning in the wood at ' Benton.' The first is
the cure of a blind girl, seven years of age, ' in supradicta villa Ben-
Ionia,' through the virtue of the water, which she was to obtain,
wherein S. Frideswide had washed her hands. The next was that of
a young man, by name Alward, who lived in the vill which is called
Sevecordia, who while cutting wood with an axe on Sunday, ' parvi
pendens diem Resurrectionis Dominieae' found his hand fixed to the
handle, so that he could not let it go. The third relates to some
1 In another MS., but of the fourteenth century, viz. MS. Lansdowne 436, which
follows this for a great part verbatim, the words run 'Ingressae sunt nemus de
Beneseya,' but whether the transcriber had before him an older copy, and read what
the Cottonian writer could not read, or whether, finding in the copy of the latter the
place vacant, had filled in of his own device the word 'de Beneseya,' there is no
evidence to show.
2 A very long dissertation is given upon this point by the writer of the articles on
S. Frideswide in the Acta Sanctorttm, vol. viii. p. 538, but the argument is mainly
taken up in showing that Henry II. did not enter into the town at the time of the
translation of S. Frideswide's bones in 11 89. This may be so, but as his palace
of Beaumont was just outside the wall, it would be extraordinary if on no occasion
he had passed within the gates of the town. But the Bollandist writer does not
touch facts which William of Malmesbury must have known when he wrote his
account, namely, King Eadward the Elder in 912, in taking possession of Oxford,
must surely have entered it. King yEthelred, according to his own showing, in 1015
was present at a Gemot in Oxford. Henry of Huntingdon makes King Edmund to
be murdered at Oxford in 1016, and in 1039 several chroniclers make King Harold
die at Oxford.
H 2
10O
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
fishermen, one of whom was seized with a violent fit and had to be
bound Ills name was Leowin, but we are not told where he hvei
Then, after these miracles, S. Frideswide proposed to her companions
to go back to Oxford, where she was honourably received «« ante
ai mm clero.' As she entered she was met by the leper, who begged
herTo hiss him, which, after making the sign of the cross, she d,d, and
he was cured of his leprosy.
In this narrative, it will be observed, we have no mention whateve
of Binsey or Thombury. On the other hand, in the Laudian MS^we
have an account of the miracle of the girl being healed » «Ba prae-
dicta Bcnlona; and then S. Frideswide is made to say to her compamons
that she thinks it time they returned to their monastery. They then
got into a boat, and were owtodW/rw*- civitate propinauumjuod
iunesna dieter,' and then we are told that there was in thts praedium
a place much overgrown with bushes of a thorny character called m
Ungua Saxonica ThorMrV Here she built the oratory and many
buddings most fit for a dwelling for the holy women, and here since
2 spol was some distance from the river, and so inconvement to the
sisters, in answer to her prayer a spring broke forth, -£. nunc us^
interest ' Then it is that the ' in/ortunalus juvems in villa quae dicitur
Zceordia; has his hand released from his axe and of course now
L story is made consistent, for ' Sevecordia,' or Seacourt is only the
other side of the stream from Binsey, the shire ditch dividing the two
as has been observed; and the narrator introduces the arcumstane
of the man being taken to her, 'mm transit i.e. by the road whi h
°ed from Seacourt to Binsey, to which reference has already been
made'. It was here, too, that the fisherman who was se.zed with a fit
^ThenVwas that, feeling her death approaching, she returned to
her monastery, and the population met her, and she healed the leper
byMthisSabout the migration from Benton to Binsey is entirely new,
and beyond either what William of Malmesbury or the writer m he
Cottonian MS. have given ; but the name Thombury, the stor, -of the
spring, and one or two of the miracles, occur, as will have been noticed
in the abstract which is given in the Oseney History, and of which
copies occur in the S. Frideswide cartularies.
The account of her death in both biographies (for neither in the
Oseney summary, nor in William of Malmesbury is any mention of it)
is narrated much in the same way as if there was a common original.
1 See ante, p. 69.
FO UN DA TION OF S. F RIDES WIDE 'S NUNNER V. i o I
She had foretold her decease, and had her grave dug, because the fol-
lowing day being Sunday, she wished no one to work. The variations
are of no special moment, except, perhaps, one passage. The Cot-
tonian MS. in respect, of her burial, merely narrates she was buried in
the church of S. Mary on the southern side. But the Laudian MS.
has the following expansion : —
1 The holy virgin was buried in the church of S. Mary, on the south
side, near the bank of the Thames. For at that time the church was
thus situated [and was so] up till the time of King Athelred, who,
when the Danes who had fled thither were burnt in it, enlarged the
circuit of the church as he had known it. Hence it happened that
the tomb which before was on the south side came afterwards to be
in the middle V
These four narratives then, the one which William of Malmesbury
procured for his history about 1125, the Laudian MS., which from
certain evidence in the MS. itself appears not to have been compiled
before 11 40, and the Claudian copy, which seems to lie between
the two, and the abstract found in the cartularies, which, though the
latest as to MS. authority, may be based on the earliest form of the story
of all, provide us with the material on which to judge of the circumstances
attending the first definite event which can be associated with Oxford 2.
We have to treat legends, it must be remembered, very differently
from myths. They, as a rule, grow up around a shadow, while
legends grow up round a substance. It is true it is not always easy
to discover it, but by taking surrounding circumstances into account
it is not unreasonable to hope to arrive at it approximately.
Some stress has been laid upon the story of a nunnery being
founded hard by about fifty years previous to the date ascribed to
the foundation of S. Frideswide ; while in the few records we possess of
that particular period such foundations are not uncommon. At this
date ^Ethelbald was ruling Mercia, having succeeded in 716. Though
a warlike king, yet, judging by the charters granted in his name, he
seems to have encouraged the foundation of religious institutions.
Again, although, as has been insisted on more than once, a site like
Oxford, so close to the borders, was not favourable altogether to
settlement, still there seemed now to be less danger to ecclesiastical
than to royal property, because King Ina of Wessex, the foe to be
feared, would not willingly have injured the Church.
1 Bodl. MS. Laud Misc. 114, folio 138. Appendix A, § 31.
2 It has not been thought necessary to refer to the variations of the legends as
given by John of Tynemouth, Capgrave, and other writers.
102 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
The name of Fridcswide, more properly spelt with the (5, and so
written in some MSS. ' Frithes-witha,' has all the characteristics of a
good Saxon name. One is perhaps at first sight surprised to find in
the Annals of Winton this : —
'In the year 721 Ethclward was king of the West Saxons. His
wife, Queen Fritheswitha, gave Taunton, which was of her patrimony,
to the church of Winchester; and Ethelward on his part added to the
same manor vii manses for the need of the church '.'
But this appears to be a various reading of the name which we find
in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the year 737, viz. Frithogith 2,
who then with Bishop Forthere visits Rome. It is singular, however,
that the two should occur about the same time, the one the daughter
of a Mercian under-king, the other the wife of the Wessex king. The
coincidence might indeed suggest that in consequence of her gifts to
the church, the West Saxon queen had been canonized, and some
later chronicler, wholly ignorant of the circumstances, had ascribed to
her that which was at the time looked upon as the highest attribute of
sanctity, namely, holy virginity — and that the several stories gathered
round her in consequence. But there must at once be set against
this, that the place associated with her name (and that certainly
anterior to the year 1004, when Ethelred's charter refers to the
foundation as something well known) was in Mercian territory and
not in West Saxon territory. Had we found a monastery dedicated
to S. Frideswide on the river Tone, or Parrot, or even on the Itchen,
there would have been some reason for the supposition ; but as the
church founded in her name was situated on the north bank of the
Thames, there is little doubt but that the fame of S. Frideswide's
monastery, in the thirteenth century, was such that the Winchester
annalist, in writing of the queen of Wessex, blundered her name, and
called her after the Oxford saint.
Then as to the story of the persecution by King Algar 8. A tradi-
1 From the Annates Monastcrii dc Winton ; printed in Wharton's Anglia
Sacra, vol. i. p. 289. Appendix A, § 32.
2 Leland also, in his Itinerary, vol. iii. p. 72 (Ilearne's ed. p. 88) gives in an extract
'Ex IJbclto Donationwn Winton. Ecclesiae' the following line, • Frithcswiglia
Regina dedit lanton?
3 In the Acta Sanctorum, Oct. viii. p. 539, there is a reference, on the authority of
Malbrancq and others, to S. Frideswide's journey to Rome, that writer speaking of
a chapel existing there dedicated to this Virgin. In this case there can be little
reasonable doubt that the recorded visit of S. Frisogith has been changed into that
of S. Frideswide through error. Whence the origin ofS. Frewisse, who is honoured
at Bomy (Pas de Calais) about five miles south of Therouanne, does not appear.
The Bollandist writer starts on the assumption that S. Frideswide went there; and
though several pages (vol. viii. 560 et seq.) are given to the discussion he does not
FO UNDA TION OF S. FRIDES WIDE 'S NUNNER Y. 1 03
tion may have been handed down of some under-king who had asked
her in marriage and whom she had refused, choosing rather to dedi-
cate herself to God. Such a story is far from improbable, and the
founding of a church with a community of women attached in order
to avoid him is quite in accordance with what we might expect. The
charter of King Ethelred seems distinctly to assert that at least certain
lands were possessed by a community calling themselves from the
name of the saint, who was buried in the church within their precincts.
And this could not have come about without some portions of the
legend being substantially true. The names of Algar, Algiva, and
Osgar, as already said, may perhaps one and all be dismissed as
additions by the transcribers of the legend.
The next point to consider is the introduction of the name Ben-
ionia, as the place to which S. Frideswide is supposed to have fled
from her persecutor. The place, it will be observed, is named by both
the biographers as if they had copied a common original. In the
summary given with the copies of the charter in the Cartulary of
S. Frideswide, as has been said, no mention is made of the journey to
this Bentonia ; she is said simply to have taken up her abode ' peace-
ably at Thornbury, now called Binsey.' Again, William of Malmesbury,
in his story, omits all reference to the longer journey, and implies that
a sojourn was made in a wood near Oxford, which would agree with this
simpler version that her abode was at Binsey. In the Cottonian MS.,
on the contrary, there is no mention of the sojourn at Binsey at all,
only at Benton. In the Laudian MS., which from the general cha-
racter of the narrative appears to be the latest, both places are named ;
first Bentonia, then Binsey *.
Now it happens very frequently, when two stories are told in
different ways, that the next chronicler inserts both stories and makes
one succeed the other. There is much reason to suppose it has
happened in this case. It is just the same probably with the story of
the messengers first being struck blind, and then the king some time
afterwards being struck blind also ; and it will be observed that the second
story is introduced somewhat awkwardly in the Cottonian version, be-
cause S. Frideswide was away at Benton when the King is supposed
to come to Oxford to find her. On the whole therefore the more prob-
seem to get beyond seventeenth and eighteenth century writers such as Malbrancq,
De Neuville, and Le Heurdre, and what they have to say appears to be simply
derived from guesses. There is probably no connection between S. Frewisse and
either Frisogita, or S. Frideswide.
1 The fourteenth-century version in the Lansdowne MS. (see ante, p. 99) com-
bines the two by making the wood of Binsey close to Bampton.
,o4 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
able solution is that Benton came to be written erroneously, that there
Qly one place actually occupied, and that most likely was Binsey.
But if this were not so, then where is Bentona? Amongst the guesses
from the sound the commonest with writers has been Benson, i.e.
Bensington, and though this is on the Thames yet it is over twenty
miles down the river. There appears to be nothing to show that this
place was in the mind of the original writer j but on the other hand it
is to be noted that Bentonia is a name which occurs in Domesday in
the list of the king's lands in Oxfordshire. The list begins with Besing-
ton, i.e. Benson, and then after several other names, e.g. Hedinton,
Cherilintone, Optone and Sciptone, it gives Bentone, which is un-
doubtedly to be identified with Bampton1, the parish of which lies on
the north bank of the Thames, some seventeen miles up the river2,
though the church and present village are some two miles away from
the bank.
It may, of course, be argued that if the nuns moved from their place
in Oxford, they may just as well have moved as far as Bampton to
begin with, and then afterwards moved to Binsey on their way back.
But if so the detail of the legend as given by both the writers, and
therefore to all appearance belonging to the earlier copy, is very in-
consistent, namely that the journey by water was 'unius horcE spa ho.
This would take them possibly to Binsey, it could not possibly take
them seventeen miles to Bampton against stream : while in the after
history of S. Frideswide's we find that the monastery held land at
Binsey, but none at Bampton.
That the nunnery situated in the town might have a ' cell,' as was
so commonly the case in after years with so many monastic establish-
ments, is not extraordinary, nor on the other hand would it have been
strange if the nuns had found the residence in Oxford inconvenient to
them, and seeking the quiet of the country actually moved thither;
1 The fourteenth century transcriber of the Lansdowne MS. tf6, already re-
ferred to as introducing the ' wood of Beneseye/ has written Bamptoma instead ot
Bentonia, that being the plaee lie considered to be meant by Benton.
» The identification with Abendon, i.e. Abingdon, which has been suggested by
some writers, has nothing to recommend it except that one legend speaks of Benton
be% ten miles off on the Thames; and as Abingdon is nearly eight it has been
thought sufficiently near to warrant the supposition.
y So far as has been observed no event in the history of Bampton seems to be
associated with the story of 6. Frideswide. Whereas as regards Binsey, throughout
the middle ages the place has belonged to S. Frideswide's monastery and still
belongs to Christ Church ; amHhough we do not find mention of S. Margaret's V\ ell
till a comparatively late date, .it-is just possible that the direct association of this
with S. Frideswide' spring, which burst forth in consequence of her prayers, may
have had its origin ■ an oldei tradition.
FO UN DA TION OF S. FRIDFS WIDE *S NUNNER Y. 1 05
and either of these would give rise to the stories which, after all, are
only so much colouring of facts. Whether S. Frideswide herself moved
during her lifetime to the quietude of Binsey, or whether the nuns
moved after her death, as appears to have been the case with the
Abingdon nuns who removed to Witham on the death of Cilia, would
make no difference. Wherever the nuns went, there, as the story
would be told, would S. Frideswide be said to go.
We need not be troubled with the fact that no place near bears the
name of Thornbury now, or that it is found in no other record. One
answer is, we have no early charters describing the immediate
surroundings of Binsey, and names of the kind are soon lost.
On the other hand, the choice of the place is not otherwise than
reasonable. The water-way was the safest and the easiest in those
times, and although somewhat circuitous it was no doubt most fre-
quently adopted. The district is one not unknown previously, if, as
has been suggested, the Wytham to which the Abingdon nuns removed
was divided only from Binsey by the Shire ditch, and but half a mile
between the spots where afterwards the two churches rose. In its
after history we certainly find the land to be in the possession of the
monastery of S. Frideswide; whether or not it had been so from
the first cannot be learnt from the charter of Ethelred in 1004, since
the possessions then granted may not all be named. When we come
to the Domesday Survey of 1087, though the record does not include
Binsey, at the same time it does not exclude it, as it may possibly
be included in the four hides near Oxford l.
It is further somewhat favourable to this theory that, in King
Stephen's reign, the meadows to the north of Binsey were chosen
as a site for a nunnery, which in its day was only second to that of
S. Frideswide and Oseney, namely Godestow. Merely a ditch sepa-
rated the parish of Binsey, which may be supposed to represent
S. Frideswide's property, from the land of the nunnery in which Fair
Rosamund passed her early years; while the meadows at the south-
eastern corner, bearing the name of the middle-eyt (i. e. the middle
island, or Medley, as it is known commonly, and gives its name to the
lock which exists there), belonged to the nuns, and there a building was
erected to which at times they could retire, and which may be said to
1 The entry is * Canonici Sanctse Frideswide . . . iiij hidae juxta Oxeneford . . .
et 100 acrae prati et 8 acrae spineti.' This is so vague that it is just possible the
' spinney ' was on the Binsey side and was the ' thorn thicket ' referred to. There
is however no reference to any property on this side of Oxford in the descriptions
of the land which are attached to the charter of King Ethelred of 1004.
io6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
have borne the same relation to Godestow as Binscy might long
before have borne to S. Frideswide's.
Such then, are the grounds on which there is good reason to
believe that, in the eighth century, the vill of Oxford, although the name
appears nowhere else in our Annals, possessed a religious community
which had settled there, and that besides their property to the south-
eastern edge of the promontory of the gravel bank already referred to,
and where their church was erected, they possessed property and
buildings at the far western extremity of the Mercian soil and so
bounded on its western side by the Shire ditch. To this in times of
war with the West Saxon king, when raids upon such a border town
as Oxford would have been frequent, and rendered the position of the
nuns unbearable, they could retire. All definite record of this com-
munity is lost, but it survives in the description given by the monks
of S. Frideswide in after years of the life of the foundress; it is in
legendary language, which cannot be construed with any certainty of
the exact meaning, though it may convey a tolerably clear outline of
the actual facts.
CHAPTER VI.
Oxford a Border Town during the Eighth and
Ninth Centuries.
From what has been said in the last chapter, it is only reasonable
now to speak of Oxford by name, as a vill of some kind must by this
time have been existing here on the border of the Thames. There is
no reason to believe it had been as yet fortified, because if it had
been, it would most probably have played some part worthy of record
in the struggles of the eighth and ninth centuries.
The year after the foundation of S. Frideswide's monastery, the
good King Ina of Wessex died, but not before he had restored by
charter to Abingdon the property which through the negligence of
Hean in carrying out the conditions of the original grant, had been
practically lost ; and as part of their land was on the Mercian side of
the Thames, we find in this charter of restoration, or rather in the
confused abstract of it, which alone has been handed down to us, the
name of iEthelred, the Mercian king, as having granted part of the
land, and the signatures of ^Ethelbald together with that of Ine
amongst those who appear to have attested the charter of confirma-
tion \ This shows that at this time Oxford was a border town, the
Thames separating the two kingdoms.
The long reign of King ^Ethelbald (who had succeeded as early as
a.d. 716) seems to have begun peacefully, and no difficulties seem to
have arisen between him and Ina, or Ina's successor iEthelheard, who
ruled the West Saxons from a.d. 728 to 740. Indeed only one battle
is recorded, namely, in the year 733, and at Sumerton, in these words : —
'Ann. 773. In this year iEthelbald captured Sumurtun2.'
It is often difficult to identify places named in the Chronicles,
especially where they stand alone, and in this case the chronicler has not
even recorded against whom the king was fighting. Two places have
been fixed on by different historians ; and one of these is the Somerton
on the Cherwell, about ten miles north of Oxford: such a battle
1 Hist. Mon. Abingdon, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 10. Note also ^Ethelbald's
Charter, ibid. p. 38.
2 The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles spell this place variously Sumurtun, Sumertun
and Sumortun.
108 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
\vould have of course affected Oxford considerably, for ii would in-
volve the supposition of the West Saxon king having previously crossed
the Thames and made a raid up the Cherwcll and occupied Somerton.
It is, however, very improbable that such a raid would have been
ded in the manner in which we find it described in the Chronicle.
For a king would scarcely be said to capture a place which was in his
own dominions ; and then, further, there is no trace of any fortress there
which would have been likely to have caused a siege. Equally im-
probable is it that JEthelbald would make a long raid across Wiltshire
and Somersetshire, and fight at Sumerton, south of the Mendip hills,
which is the second place fixed on by historians. There would have
been some serious fighting first, and other places would have been
named, which would have fallen before such a raid was successful.
The most probable explanation seems to be afforded by Henry of
Huntingdon, who, in expanding the Chronicle in respect to the events
of this year, adds ' for he determined to carry his kingdom up to the
Humber V This being so, we must look rather to the borders of Lin-
colnshire: and there we find a Sumerton which was in the middle ages
chosen as the site of a fortress, portions of which still exist 2. So that
we may suppose that during the time that ^Ethelbald and ^Ethelheard
were kings of Mercia and Wessex respectively, Oxford was not in any
way disturbed.
In the reign of Cuthred, ^Ethelheard's successor, for some reason or
another the two kingdoms went to war again. In a.d. 743, the entry
in the Chronicle describes them as both fighting against the Welsh.
Whether as allies, or whether each on his own account, we are not
told. It is just possible that their successes led to their disputing with
each other. Certain, however, it is that, in the year 752, the Battle of
Beorgford was fought — a battle vividly described by Henry of Hun-
tingdon— in which the Mercian king was put to flight. There can be
no question that this is Burford, about fifteen miles north-west from
Oxford. The circumstances would have been these. The West Saxon
king would have crossed the Thames, sweeping very possibly over
Oxford, and reaching the line of hills on the north, which are in part
capped by Wychwood Forest ; once having gained these hills he
would have the whole of the district between them and the Thames at
1 ' Edelbald igitur rex Mcrccnsis maxima virlutc super reges coajtancos provectus
omnes provincial Anglise usque ad Humbram flumen cum suis regibus sibi sub-
jeetas esse voluit et fecit.' Hen. Hunt., Rolls Series, ed. 1N79, p. 1 15.
- .Somerton Castle is in the parish of Boothby, eight miles south of Lincoln, and
on the river Brant, which flows into the YVitham near to Lincoln. Edward I.
granted a licence to crenellate it in 13
OXFORD A BORDER TOWN. 109
his mercy. Standing on the Whitehorse Hill, we can readily take in
the meaning of this conquest, for the valley of the Thames and its
tributaries lies at our feet, while in the far distance another line of
hills appears bounding the horizon, beneath which the vill of Burford
was situated. Just as the capture of the Berkshire Downs had put
the Mercian king in possession of the Abingdon and Wantage district,
so now the capture of these hills put the West Saxon king in posses-
sion of the Oxford and Witney district. Of course this was the battle
of the campaign, and, therefore, duly recorded; and the town of Bur-
ford, lying beneath the range of hills for which these two armies con-
tended, receiving its name from the ford across the Windrush, beneath
the Beorg or fortress, gave the name to the battle. No record
exists of how Oxford was then treated, but having no fortifications, it
would probably have submitted and suffered as cities then did before
a victorious army. The Mercian King iEthelbald seems to have been
thoroughly routed.
The next three years witnessed the death of both Cuthred and
^Ethelbald ; also the accession to the Mercian kingdom of the great
King OfTa, and to the West Saxon kingdom of Cynulf (Ceolwulf ). It
is clear that OfTa set about gaining back what his predecessors had
lost, but one great battle only is recorded in the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle, namely of a.d. 777. The words are brief: —
*a.d. This year Cynewulf and OfTa fought about Benesingtun, and
Offa took the town V
This, however, is to be read in connection with a passage which
occurs in the Abingdon History, of which the meaning is probably as
follows : —
' When Cynewulf was conquered by OfTa, King of the Mercians, in
battle, King Offa took possession of all those parts which had been
subject to King Cynewulf's jurisdiction on the southern side [of the
Thames] from the town of Wallingford, and along the Icknield Street,
as far as Essebury [i. e. Ashbury], and on the northern side as far as
the river Thames itself2.'
The district is clearly that to which reference has before been
made as the Abingdon and Wantage district, i.e. the low ground
between the Thames and the Berkshire hills. The accuracy of the
description will be seen readily by turning to the map, better still by
mounting up to Cwichelmshloewe, the mound covered by the clump
of trees, so well seen from the neighbourhood of Abingdon, lying as it
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno. Appendix A, § 33.
2 Hist. Mon. Abingdon, Rolls Series, ed. Stevenson. London, 1858, vol. i.
p. 14. Appendix A, § 34.
no THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
does in the midst of the range of the Berkshire downs. It stands
about midway between Wallingford on the east and Ashbury on the
west. Starting from Moulsford, which lies on the river a mile or so
below Wallingford, and mounting by the road on to the top of
the downs, the great long turf way, called the Icknield Street,
can be followed almost without intermission along the whole length
of the ridge passing beneath the foot of Cwichelmshloewe itself and
within bowshot of the great British fortress of Letcombe, and
closer still to that of Umngton, and then to within a few yards of the
old cromlech called Wayland Smith's cave. This is immediately over
Ashbury, which lies down in the hollow beneath. The great road is
continued along the downs which extend into Wiltshire for miles
further, overlooking the Whitehorse vale beneath. But at this point,
namely above Ashbury, the line of OiTa's conquest seems to have
ceased. All the way along, at almost every part of the road, the fertile
plain which was overrun by the Mercian king, can be seen lying
beneath. The line of the Thames cannot be easily traced by reason
of the high ground of Cumnor and Bagley Wood, which also hides
Oxford from the view. On the east, the limit of the conquered ter-
ritory is a natural one, since the Thames here makes its way through
a gap in what would otherwise be a continuous range of Berkshire and
Buckinghamshire downs. It will be observed in the Chronicle the
place of battle is called Bensington, the old name which is given
under 577, when the West Saxons drove out the Britons; while in the
Abingdon Chronicle, the boundary line starts from Wallingford. The
towns named, however, are scarce two miles apart, but Benson is on
the Mercian side, Wallingford on the West Saxon side of the river ; the
former representing access to the Chiltern of Buckinghamshire, the
latter that to the JEsccsdim of Berkshire.
On the west, however, it does not appear why at this time the
particular spot, namely Ashbury, should have been chosen to mark
the limit of the conquest. But it is an interesting circumstance for
this reason : Ashbury is now the last village westward in the county
of Berkshire, along this range of hills, and if a line be drawn north-
ward from that point to the Thames at Lechlade, it will be found to
follow very nearly the line of demarcation between Berkshire and
Wiltshire. We have, therefore, here a foreshadowing of the county
boundary line, before we hear anything of counties. We have not
even yet heard of the Wilsaetas or of Bearrucscire \ yet Offas con-
1 The first mention of the Wilsodas is under the year 800. The first we obtain
of Bearrucscire is under the year 860.
OXFORD A BORDER TOWN. in
quest was confined to Berkshire. It is perhaps the more remarkable
because the boundary between the counties at this point follows no
natural line of demarcation, except for a very short distance (i.e. a
small portion of a streamlet called the Coin).
Whether or not the village almost adjoining Ashbury, on the Berk-
shire side, spelt OrTentune in the Domesday Survey, be Offantune, i.e.
the tun of Oifa, and whether it derives its name from this conquest,
may be reasonably discussed, but cannot be affirmed ; and the further
question whether the White Horse cut on the hill, which has through
successive generations been preserved, was the mark then made on
the hill to denote the extent of the conquest, is a question rather for
antiquaries to discuss than to settle.
The result, however, of the battle was that Oxford was once again
not only a Mercian town but, further than that, as had been the case
once before, its inhabitants, looking from amidst their dwellings across
the river, gazed on Mercian territory as far as the eye could reach.
And Oxford seems to have remained Mercian for some time ; for
successive kings of Mercia extended rather than otherwise their king-
dom, which might now have absorbed the whole island, as it had
threatened once before to do. But Ecgbryht, who had succeeded to
Wessex in 800, was energetically extending that kingdom also, both
west and east. The battle at Ellendun1 in 823 is thought to imply
that the Mercians meanwhile had already extended their kingdom
into Wiltshire but were now driven out, and at the same time the
West Saxon king while driving the Mercians out of Wessex, extended
his kingdom into Kent. All the country on the south side of the
Thames seemed to submit readily to his arms ; while the Mercians
had found another formidable enemy in the East Angles. Then, under
the year 8 2 7, the Chronicle records that Ecgbryht conquered the king-
dom of Mercia, and thus laid the foundation of the single kingdom
of England. The result, however, can scarcely be said to have made
Oxford again West Saxon ; rather it became what is best understood
by the comprehensive name English, because, though as yet by no
means all the kingdoms had become definitely united in one, yet so far
1 Usually ascribed to one of the Allingtons in Wiltshire. That to the south-
east of Amesbury may be put out of the question. That to the north-west of
Chippenham, and that to the east of Devizes might have each something to be said
for them : the first of the two looking forward to the Danish battle-ground of
878 ; the second looking, perhaps, back to the battles of 592 and 715, supposing
that Woddesborough is Woodborough, an outlying hill on the south of the
high range of the Marlborough Downs. Still there is little to support either view ;
it is more likely a battle fought on some ' dun ' of which the name has not been
handed down to us.
Iia THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
as the special district of Oxford was concerned, there were no more
troubles in store for the place in consequence of its being a border
town. The ruler of Mercia continued, it is true, to bear the title of
king for some little while after, but Buhred was an independent
king rather in name than in fact. Except, therefore, in the event of
internal rebellion it might have been supposed Oxford would have
been safe from all assault.
CHAPTER VIL
Oxford during the Danish Incursions in the
Ninth and Tenth Centuries.
Although Oxford was, as has been seen, no longer subject to the
danger consequent on being a border town, a new and unlooked-for peril
arose from it being situated on a navigable river. No sooner did in-
ternal struggles seem to have come to an end than a new and foreign foe
began harassing the country. The Danes, it may be presumed, having
heard of the prosperity of their old neighbours the Saxons and the
Angles in the new country, thought well to join them. But they were
met by difficulties, for the whole land had practically been partitioned out,
and therefore whatever they desired they would have to gain by conquest,
much in the same way as the former settlers had gained it, from the
British occupants : and the task of the Danes now was of course
much harder than that of the Saxons and their fellow-settlers some
four hundred years previously. The peculiarity of their warfare in the
earlier years of their invasion was by sailing up estuaries and rivers,
ravaging the country, seizing whatever towns lay on the banks, and
then returning to their ships. We must suppose they brought over
with them a fleet of boats of shallow draft suitable for the purpose.
Between the years 832 and 837 Wessex seems to have been attacked
on all sides, first at Sheppey on the east, at Charmouth on the south,
and then on the west by the enemy sailing up the Bristol Channel, where
they found ready allies in the still unconquered Welsh. Egbert lived
to see his great work of pacification neutralised, and during the twenty
years of his successor's reign (837-857) the raids were continued with
increased vigour. We find the Danes landing at Southampton, then
in the isle of Portland ; next as far north as Lindsey : then in East
Anglia ; then in Kent, then at Charmouth again, and then again at the
mouth of the Parret. In 851 they ventured up the Thames as far as
London, and their victories increasing, they began after this to carry
their ravages inland, e. g. into Surrey ; but still not far from the river, to
which they could retire and take refuge in their boats. These annual
voyages over the Northern Ocean occasioning them loss and delay, in
1
114 IIIE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
855 ^ey began to winter here, so as to begin their work of depreda-
tion early in the spring, or perhaps earlier if the frost allowed : and the
result was that places far more inland began to suffer. And, what was
worst of all, they had found an asylum amongst the East Angles, who
appear to have bought their own peace and quietness at the expense
of the rest of the kingdom, as it gave the 'heathen army' (as the
Chronicles usually describe the Danes) an admirable base for their
operations. From this base they were in 868 enabled to seize upon
Nottingham and even take up their winter quarters there. The tribu-
tary king of Mercia attempted to drive them out, and called the West
Saxon king to his aid, but without success. York followed Nottingham
in 869, and Peterborough in 870, when they devastated the glorious
abbey, known then as Medeshampstead ; and in 871 they ventured
much further than they had ever done before up the Thames.
Had they succeeded in this more important raid than any which
perhaps they had as yet attempted, Oxford would no doubt have
fallen a prey, and we should most likely have found its name appear-
ing in the pages of history some forty years earlier than is the case.
But Reading bears the honour of saving, for the present at least, the
Upper Thames district from their ravages.
The circumstances were these. At Reading the Danes seem to have
left their boats and encamped on the bank of gravel in the angle
formed between the Kennet and the Thames, which, just 250 years
after, was chosen as the site of the great Reading Abbey1. The tem-
porary fortress which they made, or which they found to hand, was
suddenly threatened by ^Ethelred, king of Wessex, who in company
with his brother Alfred, having heard of their design, had marched
to meet them and prevent their further progress up the Thames.
Whatever might have been their first intention, it is clear that when
they saw the advantages of gaining the ridge of the Berkshire Hills, the
before-named jEscesdtm, a large portion of their number made for it
by the way of Englefield. At this village, however, they were met by
the ealdorman Jilthelwulf, and driven back to their camp at Reading.
Here they for a time withstood the assault of ^thelred and Alfred,
who next day came up, most probably by the line of road skirting the
south bank of the Thames. The position of the Danes was a pre-
carious one, in this triangular space with the two sides surrounded by
the rivers and a strong force assaulting the third side. Had there
1 The foundation of Reading Abbey dates from 11 21, though the charters
assigning them their property are not dated till n 25. The great abbey church
itself was not completed ready for consecration till 1163.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 115
been the few only who had been left behind in the first instance, they
might have taken to their boats and fled directly they found the
Wessex king was approaching, but as the whole of the army were
here, in consequence of the repulse at Englefield, and as they had
been rendered bold by previous victories, they gave fight to ^Ethelred,
and rushing out they broke through the West Saxon lines and made
for the hills. There was no ^Ethelwulf now to bar their way at Engle-
field. He had come up with his forces to join ^Ethelred, and had
unhappily been slain.
At night the Danes reached the ridge, by much the same road no
doubt as can still be traced on the map from Englefield up to
Lowbury, a spof where they found a camp to their hands, and which
from recent excavations is shown to have been previously occupied in
Roman times1. JEthelred and Alfred however lost no time. The
latter knew the country well. Born at Wantage, beneath the very range
now before him, it is not improbable that from his early years he was
acquainted with the roads and distances.
Returning along the road by which he had come, as far perhaps as
Moulsford, ^Ethelred mounted the hill by a straight road, which seems
to have left behind it traces still to be seen on the map, and as we
gather from Asser's Chronicle, before sunset gained another part of the
rising ground2, a little to the north-east of that occupied by the Danes.
In the early morning, since the Danos had not anticipated such vigour
on the part of the West Saxons, they were not prepared for battle,
and thus by the clever tactics of iElfred and the prowess of his
men, they met with a severe defeat; a king, several 'jarls,' and many
thousands of the enemy were slain. It is the first important defeat we
read of in the annals of their incursions : the battle of 871 not only
saved Oxford, but saved the whole of the Abingdon and Wantage district
from being pillaged by the Danes. No fortified towns then appear to
have existed to prevent their devastating the country wherever they went.
It was at this time that ^Elfred became king. Through all the
entries in the Chronicle during the twenty-nine years of his reign, there
is no statement which implies, directly or indirectly, that iElfred came
1 The camp, though small, must have been intended for a lengthened occupa-
tion, for at one comer remains of buildings have been discovered (1884) : Roman
coins (of late date), abundance of pottery, and the invariable oyster-shells, testify
sufhcently to the square earthworks (still partially visible) having been once
a sojourning place of the Romans.
2 Curiously enough, on the map it is marked as the ' King's standing ground.'
The name unfortunately cannot be connected with ^Ethelred's days, but is supposed
to be associated with the ' Fair mile ' on which racehorses were trained early in the
present century.
I 2
u6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
to Oxford, or indeed nearer to it than his marches along the line of
the Berkshire Hills would bring him. He is continually fighting the
Danes, and with more or less success, on the eastern and western ex-
tremities of the old kingdom of Wessex, and it is most probably as much
due to the fact of his having in previous years provided a fleet, as to the
treaty which he made with Guthrum after the fight at Ethandune in 878,
that the Danish incursions were much checked, and that they did not
again venture up the Thames so far as Oxford during his reign.
In the reign however of his successor, Eadward the Elder, they seem
to have burst over Mercia from the old district of the East Angles,
which, as has been already said, they were allowed to occupy. It
seems that in 905 they went westward, so as to reach Cricklade, probably
not by the Thames valley, but across Mercia. King Eadward pursued
them as far as he was able, and retaliated by overrunning East Anglia.
It is perhaps impossible to define exactly the position which the
kingdoms held towards one another, or to the chief kingdom of the
West Saxons at this particular time. It has been seen how the East
Angles had independently made peace with the Danes, and how the
latter had been using that territory as a base from which to make in-
cursions upon Mercia; and it will be noticed that at times Mercia made
peace also, as it were independently : and now, in 91 2, the year in which
we find Oxford first mentioned, the entry in the Chronicle stands as
follows : —
'This year died JEthered ealdorman of the Mercians, and king
Eadward took possession of London and of Oxford and of all the
lands which owed obedience thereto.'
< This year jEthelfted, lady of the Mercians, came to Scaer-gate on
the holy eve, Invention of the Holy Cross, and there built the burh ;
and the same year that at Bridge[north] V
As to what is implied politically by the phrase 'took possession of
will be considered later on ; but there is little doubt it had an imme-
diate and practical effect on the town of Oxford : although the fact is
not here stated, the surrounding circumstances point very strongly to
this being the date when Oxford was fortified. It would appear that
in 911 Mercia had been again overrun by the Danes, who seem this
time to have made Northumbria the base of their operations ; and on
the death of iEthered the ealdorman of Mercia, his widow, the lady
1 The first paragraph is found under this year in the five earliest of the Anglo-
Saxon Chronicles. The sixth has the same paragraph under the year 910. The
second paragraph is only found in the second and third Chronicle in order of date,
and these, as will be seen later, are referred to under the letters B and C. Ap-
pendix A, § 35.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 1 17
^Ethelflaed, seems to have erected fortifications on all the rivers likely
to be ascended by them. In 9 10 she had built the 'burn' at Bremesbury.
In 912, at Scargate and at Bridgnorth on the Severn. In 913, King
Eadward constructed the 'burn' at Hertford on the Lea, and the
Lady ^Ethelflaed that at Tamworth ; and in the next year that at Eddes-
bury and Warwick ; and in the next at Cyricbury, Weardbury, and
Runcorn, and so on. The Chronicle for several years presents a record
of the Danes attacking places, and either Eadward or his sister iEthel-
flasd defending them, and building fortresses for their defence. Before
this time the mention of the ' burh ' or fortress is rare in regard to a
town, and no case is recorded of any being built.
This date then it is thought with some reason may be applied to the
fortification of Oxford, inasmuch as it seems to fit in with the series
which are spoken of as fortified for the first time.
And if it is asked what was the probable nature of the fortifications,
it may be replied that analogy leads us to attribute the castle hill, which
still exists, to this particular date. For comparing several places to-
gether mentioned in the above list the one common feature is a conical
mound of earth. Those nearest to Oxford, i. e. Tamworth and War-
wick, overlooking respectively the Avon and a tributary of the Trent
called the Tame, possess mounds remarkably similar to that at Oxford,
the former being somewhat more lofty and larger, the latter somewhat
smaller. But at Warwick the early mound has been subjected more to
the system of the fourteenth century fortification of the castle, and from
its position above a rapid slope has been incorporated so to speak in
the line of wall. At Tamworth it has been left more in its pristine
shape, and the ditches surrounding it remain much more perfect, and
in one part masonry which may be coeval with the original structure
remains against the inner edge.
The following description is given of the fortification of Rumcofa,
i. e. Runcorn in Cheshire, and one of the series : —
* Its situation was judiciously chosen by Ethelfleda queen of the
Mercians for the foundation of a town and castle, erected in 916; for
here, by a projection of a tongue of land from the Lancashire side, the
bed of the Mersey is suddenly contracted from a considerable breadth
to a narrow channel, easily commanded from the shore. It was just
opposite to this gap, as it is called, that Ethelfleda built the last of the
range of castles by which she protected the borders of her extensive
domain, and though no vestige of the building remain, its site is
marked by the name of the Castle given to a triangular piece of land
surrounded by a mound of earth, jutting out into the river, guarded on
the water-side by ledges of rocks and broken precipices, and cut off
u8 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
from the land by a ditch at least six yards wide. This fortress, in its
entire state must have afforded an excellent defence against the naval
inroads of the Danes, who ran up the rivers with their fleets at this
period and committed the most cruel ravages V
In the other places which have been identified, the mounds are
more or less a prominent feature ; some are natural and some arti-
ficial, but in the former case no doubt scarping and similar work was
resorted to in order to render them more efficacious 2.
One or two considerations suggest themselves respecting the general
character of the fortifications of the town of Oxford. Admirably
situated as it was in respect of repelling attacks from land forces,
with the Thames on the west and south, and the Cherwell on the
east, it was dangerously open towards the north. In all probability a
fosse of some kind was excavated separating the southern end from
the rest of the gravel promontory, and following no doubt generally
the line occupied afterwards by the northern wall of the city, but when
this was first done there is no means whatever for ascertaining. It
should also be borne in mind that, at this time, although in their
ravages the Danes freely used their boats, Oxford had still some pro-
tection on these three sides ; the main stream of the Thames does
not seem in any part to have washed the gravel bank on which
Oxford was built. Even up to Elizabeth's reign, as shown in Agas'
map, something more than ditches joined the Trill mill stream on the
west with the Cherwell on the east, on either side of the ground after-
wards occupied by the Broad Walk; and the excavation for the
construction of the new buildings at Christ Church facing the meadow
showed the presence of a stream, which must have washed close by
the enclosure of S. Frideswide's 3.
In following the course of the Thames along the western side of
Oxford, though it may be doubted if ever the main stream was that
which is now known as the Shire-ditch, on the other hand, the proba-
bilities are that it was never the easternmost of the seven streams which
1 Aikin's Forty Miles round Manchester, 1795, p. 417.
2 There are difficulties in the identification of several of the names. Bremesbury
is assigned to Bramsbury in Lincolnshire. Scargate has been guessed to be Sarrat
in Hertfordshire, on the Chess, a tributary of the Colne ; but there is nothing to
recommend the identification. As to Hertford there can be no doubt as to the two
' burhs,' and this was specially important on account of the meeting of the three
streams. Cyricbury has been identified with Chcrbury in Shropshire; and Weard-
burh has been supposed to be Warborough in Oxfordshire, but this is very
improbable. ' Eadesbyrig ' is probably Eddislmry in Cheshire. All the burhs
which can be identified seem to he at or near the Mercian frontier, or readily
accessible by the rivers.
■ See paper by Mr. Conradi, Oxfird Arch, and Hist. Proceedings, 1863, New
Series, vol. i. p. 217.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. II 9
the road to Botley crossed, and which gave it the name of the Seven-
Bridge Road. So again with respect to the Cherwell ; there probably
ran between the main stream and Oxford one or two smaller streams ;
and two of these may now be seen enclosing Magdalen Water-walks.
The result generally speaking, therefore, was that Oxford was sur-
rounded on the south and west and east by what was probably marsh
land, and which could readily be changed into a swamp by damming
up here and there a portion of the several streams which intersected
it. This of course would afford great natural protection to a place, as
besiegers would fight under great disadvantages.
But still, without a fortress Oxford would have been much at the
mercy of the Danes, and a spot therefore appears to have been chosen,
and the mound, with accompanying ditches, was constructed; the earth
thrown out from them provided material for the mound, there being
no natural rise of the ground of any consequence in this direction.
This was the Castle. The circumstances which led to the western
edge of the town being chosen instead of the south-eastern corner,
which would have guarded the mouth of the Cherwell as well as the
Thames, are not apparent. Divested of nearly all its buildings, and
with the streams probably more numerous than they are now, and
with undrained land surrounding the greater part of the town, the
place must have presented so different an aspect from what it does
now, that it would be futile to attempt to argue the question whether
the military engineer of those days did wisely or unwisely in fixing on
the spot which he did.
And while speaking of the fortifications, it might probably be
thought well that something should here be said upon what there was
existing at this time to fortify. The probabilities are, that though the
space available for occupation was practically marked out by nature;
there were, at this date, but few houses built upon it. Most towns
appear to have had a nucleus which has in some measure determined
the position and shape which they afterwards assumed. Sometimes it
has been a castle, as at Warwick, at the back of which the town has
grown up, till eventually it has been walled round and made separate
and distinct from the castle. At others it has encircled some religious
foundation, as at Coventry. In Oxford, at the time spoken of, it is not
at all clear whether the religious establishment was still one of nuns,
or whether it had been changed into a monastery, or whether it was
of sufficient importance to have gathered round it any extensive popu-
lation ; but in all probability whatever were so gathered, lay above it
on the slope between the northern enclosure wall and the road which
120 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
afterwards came to be the High Street ; this group of houses would
be bounded on the western side by the road which afterwards had
the name of Southgate Street, then Fish Street, and in later years
S. Aldate's.
There is not much likelihood of a road such as this having
materially changed its position, and one or two considerations suggest
themselves in connection with it. To all appearance there could
scarcely have been any other line of road across the South Hincksey
meadows than that occupied by the present causeway, and it may be
taken for granted also that Folly Bridge, which takes the place of the
old ' Grand-pount,' occupies the site very nearly, if not exactly, of the
older fords over the shallow streams which intersected those meadows.
Possibly, indeed it may be said probably, this was the original ford
from which the town derived its name.
As long as Mercia and Wessex were two distinct kingdoms, it is
not so probable, though of course possible, that a road of great
importance would have been made across the river at this point, but
on the union of the two kingdoms such would have been of a ' first
necessity,' both for commercial and military purposes1. It is true the
rivers were themselves the chief means of communication, but of
course they were first of all restricted to the few, who could afford
to possess or to hire boats ; and next the traffic depended much on
the seasons ; in the time of heavy rains the rivers would be so swollen
and the banks so overflowed that the lading and unlading boats would
present as many difficulties as the passage of the boats themselves
would in dry seasons when there was not sufficient water in the
streams to float them. The roads, therefore, must have supplemented
the rivers in the way of traffic to a considerable degree, and the
country people no doubt made use of such ways, tracks and paths,
more or less available according as the reeves and other shire officers
provided them. Further, there is some reason to suppose, that one of
the direct lines from the north-west to London, in the eleventh cen-
tury, and possibly in the tenth century, passed by Oxford ; the road
up to this point would have been carried across the district north
1 The making and repairing of roads and bridges were amongst the three charges
always retained on estates when all others might be remitted. The trinoda neces-
sitas,?iS it was called, consisted of — (i) Bryge-bot, i.e. for repairing roads and
bridges; (2) Burgbot, for repairing fortifications; and (3) Fyrd, for providing
the military and naval forces for the defence of the kingdom. These charges are
referred to frequently in the early charters, and in all probability, on the annexation
of the portion of Mercia, one of Eadward's first cares would have been to have
seen that there were good roads provided lor communication.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 121
of the Thames, but at Oxford, crossing the Thames and following the
line of the Thames valley, would have been continued southward.
This would be the road already referred to as crossing the ford at
the point where Folly Bridge now exists ; it would cross the South
Hincksey meadows, and then pursue its course beneath the rising
ground, by one or other of the many roads which intersect this district1.
This road, then, which gave access from Wessex, passed through the
centre of Oxford ; leaving the river, it skirted the enclosure of S. Frides-
wide on the eastern side, and gradually ascended the sloping gravel
bank in a northerly direction, where it was met by another road
which, coming from the east, connected Oxford with the Wal-
lingford district. The road from Berkshire crossed this, and being
continued gave access to the North, and formed the most natural
outlet, so to speak, for Oxford as long as it was in Mercian territory2.
In all probability on either side of this, as far as the site of the North
Gate, houses lay scattered here and there at this time when Oxford was
fortified. On the erection of the castle, however, the buildings which
may have been hitherto few in a westerly direction would grow up
thickly, on the eastern bank of the castle ditch, and by degrees plots
of ground with a solitary building would give way to rows of houses
thickening as they neared the castle, thinning as they neared Carfax.
Thus in a natural way the four quarters of Oxford would be formed.
First of all the south-eastern would have been most occupied because
of S. Frideswide's; next, portions of the north-western and south-
western on account of the castle ; the north-eastern would probably
have been left more open for a longer time than any.
Although somewhat anticipating the record, it must be adduced
here, as one important fact in the evidence bearing upon the growth
of Oxford, that the first parish church of which we find mention is
S. Martin's, which is situated at the meeting of the roads, and, as
before stated, at the highest point on the gravel bank ; and it may be
noted in passing, that although there was no other S. Martin necessi-
tating a distinctive term, it seems for long to have borne the appel-
lation of S. Martin's at Carfax, and indeed Carfax church. But
further, it is essentially, and always has been, the city church; hence no
doubt sustaining the privileges which it had acquired from being the
1 The line of road on the west and south of the Thames in this part cannot now
be followed, owing to the many alterations which have taken place as different
properties became enclosed.
2 It will be observed that the road leading into Oxford on the north, and passing
by Cutslow, is referred to in one of the boundaries attached to S. Frideswide's
Charter of 1004 as ' the Port-way,' i.e. the town road.
122 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
first parish church in the city. Other circumstances are corro-
borative of the position assigned to it, inasmuch as there is good
evidence of the Port-mannimots, or Town Councils, having been
held in the churchyard, which was once, and before sundry encroach-
ments, of much greater extent than now.
On looking at the map it will be at once seen how this central spot
is evenly surrounded by the parish which belongs to it, and how that
in its turn forms the nucleus round which other parishes cluster ; and
although the division of the parishes belongs to a period much later
than that under consideration, the circumstances just mentioned all
hang together, and bring out into prominence the importance of the
three elements in the formation of the plan of Oxford, namely, the
crossing of the roads at Carfax in the centre, S. Frideswidc's in the
south-eastern quarter, the Castle on the low ground at the far western
extremity. The following hundred and fifty years made no doubt
a great change in the aspect of Oxford, but it was probably not till
Robert D'Oilgi's time that the outline of the town became clearly
defined by fortifications and boundaries, or marked out definitely by its
streets ; but the growth was along the old original lines, the erection
of the castle being an important factor not only in the formation of
the plan of the town, but in its progress towards that importance
which we find it had attained in the eleventh century.
Before continuing the record of events, it is thought well also to say
a few words respecting the authority of the passage which has been
quoted, representing, as it does, the earliest historical mention of
Oxford. And it is considered to be of all the more importance from
the circumstance that several pages of this treatise have been occupied
in exhibiting the worthless character of so much which passes for
history ; hence it is necessary to point out distinctly the grounds on
which this passage is accepted as true history, while so many have
been absolutely rejected. And what is here said will, in a measure,
apply to some of the other facts narrated later on, though not perhaps
in the same degree, as to the passage in question.
That passage is the first mention of Oxford in the chief record
we possess of events which took place in the tenth century. For
convenience it is called ' The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,' and while for
some reasons that title best describes it, there is the further reason
that it has, since the invention of printing it is believed, always been
referred to by that title. But while using the name it must not be
overlooked that there are several Chronicles, or rather several editions
of the one Chronicle, all of which very much resemble one another in
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 12$
the earlier part, but gradually differ more and more, because being
kept in different monasteries events more or less local became tran-
scribed into one which were not transcribed into others *.
This series of Chronicles then, included under this one name, com-
prise, when taken altogether, the period from the invasion by Caesar to
the end of King Stephen's reign. We know nothing of the personality
of the authors, but there is good reason to suppose that there was
one record, compiled officially from all the available sources, about
the time of King Alfred, and then carried on by different but con-
temporary compilers.
The internal evidence derived from a comparison of the various
MSS. would fix the general compilation about the time named ; but
we have, besides, the record of the Norman poet of the twelfth century,
Geoffrey Gaimar, which is not to be despised, who refers distinctly to
it being compiled under the direction of King Alfred, and chained in
the Bishop's palace at Winchester 2.
Of the manuscripts which we possess of this valuable Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle, the chief in importance as to date is that (A) preserved in
the library of Corpus Christi College in Cambridge, extending from
the invasion by Caesar to the year 891, and there is little reason to
doubt but that the MS. itself is absolutely of this latter date ; in other
words, that we have the Chronicle as the chronicler left it, brought
down to his own time, and are not dependent upon a later copyist,
which is so generally the case with our early records. There are inter-
polations by a later hand, seemingly of the twelfth century, and con-
tinuations by several hands, belonging to the various periods which
the history covers, but the difference of the handwriting is clearly
marked. It is very possible that this is the identical copy referred to
by Gaimar, as having been written by Alfred's order and chained up
at Winchester.
Another MS. (B) of a century later, and preserved amongst the
Cottonian MSS. (the reference is Tiber. A. vi) is written in the same
handwriting down to the year 977. It formerly belonged to the
monastery of S. Augustine at Canterbury.
1 Although in most cases it is thought sufficient to speak of it as the Anglo-
Saxon Chronicle, in some cases the term Anglo-Saxon Chronicles will be used,
and the particular Chronicle referred to by an index letter.
2 ' A Chronicle by name, a great book ; The English compiled it. Now it is of
such authority, that at Winchester, in the Bishop's Palace, There of Kings is the
true history, and the lives, and the memoirs. Alfred the King had it in his posses-
sion, and had it fixed by a chain, So that any one who wished to read it, could
well look at it, But could not from its place at all remove it.' Geoffrey Gaimar ;
L'Estorie des Engles, line 2332.
124 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Two more (C, D) of the eleventh century are preserved also in the
Cottonian collection (the references being respectively Tiber B. i and
Tiber B. iv) ; one is in the same handwriting to the year 1046, and is.
continued by a later hand to 1066; the other is in the same hand to
1016, and is continued to 1079. ^ ne former of these is called by
Josselyn the Abingdon Chronicle, and it may well have been kept
there, and the latter part been compiled in the monastery itself.
There is one (E) in the Bodleian Library (the reference being
Laud 636), written in one hand to 1122, with additions made by
various hands to the year 11 54. This, from the circumstance of
several charters belonging to the Peterborough monastery being tran-
scribed into it, seems to have been preserved there.
Lastly, there is one (F) in the Cottonian collection (Domit. A. viii),
written in the twelfth century and more carelessly than the others.
There is also a Fragment of another copy of the eleventh century in
the same collection.
There are additions and variations in all, so that it would appear
that there were several copies distributed about the ninth century ; of
these, only one absolutely remains, while others have formed the
basis from which MSS. B to E, and others, have been copied, with
the additions which progress of time had rendered necessary, and
with interpolations which acquaintance with other records had enabled
their possessors to make.
It will thus be seen that we have for the greater part of the period
which has to be traversed, what may be called distinctly contemporary
authority, and in some cases a consensus of that authority ; very dif-
ferent from the material on which the writers have relied who carry
back the history of Oxford to King Mempric, or that of the University
to the Greek scholars, or to King Alfred. Remembering too the
evidence we have of the Chronicle being compiled by order of King
Alfred, and the probability that we have the very copy chained up by
his command at Winchester, it would have indeed been strange that
had he founded Oxford, or built any college there, that no note what-
ever should have been inserted in that Chronicle.
As a matter of fact, however, in none of these MSS., cither in the
original writing or in the interpolations by later hands, does the name
of Oxford once occur until the year 912, and then the one circum-
stance is recorded about Oxford which has already been quoted.
This passage, exactly as it has been given, is found in all the six MSS.
named, although in MS. F it is inserted (probably erroneously) under
the events of the year 910.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 125
Besides these different copies of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle we have
the writings of several historians of the twelfth century who have made
use of them in the histories which they wrote, adding all the informa-
tion which was obtainable from other sources at that time. One or
two of the chief of these will be briefly noticed. First among them in
point of date stands Florence of Worcester. He died in the year
1 1 18, but his Chronicle was continued by another hand to the year
1 131; and, in one or two MSS., to ten years later still1. He uses
some copy (possibly a different one from any we possess) of the
Chronicle between 455 and 597, and then chiefly Beda, inserting from
lives of saints, till 732, when he returns to the Chronicle, but still
intersperses many notes derived from the lives of saints. Further on,
he makes use of Asser's Life of Alfred as already said, and, besides
the legends of saints, material derived from other sources. Again, it
is to be observed that he has found no mention of Oxford worthy of
record till he comes to this same year, 912.
His record of this year does not exactly follow the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle, but stands thus : —
' dccccxii. iEthered, earl and patrician, lord and under-king of the
Mercians, a man of excellent worth, after having done many good
deeds, died. After his death his wife JEgelfleda, daughter of King
Alfred, for some time most firmly held rule over the kingdom of the
Mercians, except London and Oxford, which cities her brother King
Eadward kept in his own power2.'
In the Chronicle of Simeon of Durham, which terminates in 11 19
(and there is reason to suppose the writer did not live long after-
wards), the first mention of Oxford is in connection with the same
event : it is simply a translation of one of the Chronicles, and as he
puts it under the year 910 he has probably followed a Chronicle of
the type referred to as F : —
* King Edward took possession of London and Oxford and all which
belong thereto .'
Next in order must be named Henry of Huntingdon. He issued
the first edition (so to speak) of his history in 1135, and had ample
1 There are three MSS. existing as early as the twelfth century, and two or three
besides of the thirteenth century. The oldest is perhaps that in Corpus Christi
Library in Oxford ; it once belonged to Worcester : the next that in the Lambeth
Library; it belonged originally to Abingdon Abbey.
2 Florence of Worcester Chronicon, sub anno. Mon. Hist. Brit., p. 569.
Appendix A. § 36.
3 Simeon of Durham Historia, sub anno. Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 686. Only one MS.
exists of the twelfth century, i.e. in C.C.C. Library, Cambridge. Appendix A. § 37.
126 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
opportunities for examining all the sources of history which the king-
dom could afford. His first mention of Oxford, again, is under the
year 912, and to the same purport as Simeon of Durham; but his
translation, or rather summary, from the Anglo-Saxon is different from
that of the other two : —
1 In the following year, Edred earl of Mercia having died, King
Edward seized London and Oxford, and all the land belonging to the
Mercian province1.'
Geoffrey Gaimar, to whom reference has already been made, must
be added to the list of twelfth-century historians who have gone over
this ground, and incorporated or extended the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
The Estorie which we possess begins with the arrival of Cerdic, and
ends with the death of William II, 1100. He composed his history
soon after the middle of the twelfth century, and was prepared to add
to it the life of Henry I., but did not do so.
His first mention of Oxford is also under the same year, and the
following is an English rendering of his version of the story : —
'Just at this time there died a king; his name
Was Edelret ; who o'er the Mercians ruled.
This Edelret o'er London too, held sway :
Elveret [Alfred] the King it was who placed him there,
He had received it not in heritage.
When near to death he did that which was wise,
He rendered to King Eadward his just right
With everything which did thereto belong;
London he yielded, ere he yet was dead,
The city, too, he gave, of Oxeneford,
And with them all the country and the shires
Which to the cities did belong2.'
There are others of the twelfth century, who copy the Chronicles
direct or incorporate the above-named into their own histories; and
later on numerous chroniclers, some of them of great esteem, of
the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, go over the period from
Augustine to the Conquest ; and, in some cases, while copying the
substance of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, either directly or at second
hand from the twelfth century chronicles, vary it ; but their variations
and interpolations as regards the early period, are obviously not
worthy of any especial consideration, and certainly are not to be
accepted as authorities when we can go ourselves to the very source
whence they derived their information. These therefore are not noticed.
1 Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, Rolls Series, 1879, p. 155. There
are several MSS. of the twelfth and thirteenth century. Appendix A. § 38.
'2 Geoffrey Gaimar, V Estorie des Envies, line 3477. Printed in Monumenta
Hist. Britannica, p. 807. Appendix A. § 39.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 127
It will be observed that the one event which has yet been recorded
from the Chronicle directly naming Oxford, is told in a slightly
different way by one or two of the twelfth century chroniclers. It does
not appear at all certain that they had any further data whatever for
their conclusions than we have now, but they deduce what they add
by way of expansion from other parts of the Chronicle. Florence of
Worcester, by taking into account the entry in the Chronicle under
the year 918, in which JEthelflsed is recorded to have died 'in the
eighth year of her lordship over the Mercians/ easily deduces the fact
that Eadward did not at once take possession of all Mercia. Henry
of Huntingdon, it will be observed on the other hand, is less careful,
adding to the taking of Oxford, 'all the land belonging to the Province
of Mercia/ possibly reading the word 'thereto' as referring to the
Mercians, instead of as referring to London and Oxford. By itself the
passage might bear his interpretation, but taken in connection with other
circumstances, that of Florence is no doubt the right one. Geoffrey
of Gaimar in the course of his expansion introduces, as will have been
observed, other considerations, but such as may be deduced from pre-
vious passages in the Chronicle, and by no means necessarily implying
any reference to further records than those which we possess.
In order to gauge the value of these variations some few con-
siderations must be taken into account, in respect of London as well
as of Oxford, since they are both named together.
It will be remembered that the year after the battle of JEscesdun
in 871, which saved Oxford, the Danish army, which had again
assembled at Reading, were driven down the Thames to London,
and there took up their winter quarters, through the cowardice of
the Mercians, who readily made peace with them. In 878, after
the fighting in the neighbourhood of Chippenham, where JElfred
made ' a peace ' with Guthrum 1, London appears, so far as the
boundary line goes, to have been left outside the Danish territory,
but whether or not it was made free at this time, it is clear that
the Danes were shortly afterwards driven out from the city, for
under the year 886 iElfred is recorded in the Chronicles to have ' set
in order ' (gesette) London ; this is translated by the historians ' restau-
1 Generally called the Peace of Wedmore ; but it is difficult to see on what
grounds. It is true that one of the Articles of the Peace was Guthrum's baptism,
which took place near to Athelney, and afterwards Alfred invited him on a twelve
days' visit to Wedmore where his ' chrism losing ' took place. But the ' Peace '
must have been made and signed some time before the visit, probably immediately
after the battle of Ethandune and in the neighbourhood of Chippenham where the
Danish head-quarters seem to have been.
128 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
ravit Y and it implies, perhaps, that the fortifications which had been
destroyed by the Danes were renewed. The Chronicle also adds,
1 Alfred then committed the burh to the keeping of the ealdorman
^thered.' So far we see Gaimar has distinct authority for the state-
ment that Alfred had placed ^Ethered there (mi's i /'avert) ; but there
follows : — ' he had it not in heritage.' Possibly what is meant is, that
since London and the adjacent country had been practically severed
from Mercia, the ealdorman had no rights whatever over it, and that
JElfred having won back the city from the Danes, he had as it were
granted it to ^Ethered for his lifetime only, and therefore it was due to
be given back to Alfred's heirs at his death. The words of Florence
also 'kept in his power' (sibi retinuit) imply the same thing, that is to
say, the city was already in his possession.
Indeed the word in the Chronicle translated 'took possession of
seems to have a special meaning. The expression of Simeon of
Durham, suscepit, and that of Henry of Huntingdon, saisivi'/, taken in
its legal sense, are nearer to the original. The word feng, which is used
in this case in the Chronicle, is frequently found in the sense of a king
succeeding to his kingdom — that is, in due course of inheritance.
It is so in 800, when Ecgbryht succeeds to the kingdom of Wessex ;
in 819, when Ceolwulf succeeds to Mercia; in 825, when Wiglaf
succeeds to Mercia; and in 828, when he again returns to his king-
dom; and in 836 and 871, when ^Ethelwulf and Alfred respectively
succeed to the West Saxon kingdom 2. It is, however, also used of
a bishop taking charge of a see 3.
Although Gaimar does not say so, it is clear that London and
Oxford in the year 9 1 2 stand on the same footing as regards Eadward's
taking them into his possession. And the question resolves itself into
this : if London, in consequence of the incursion of the Danes, had
been separated from Mercia, it is probable that Oxford had been also.
In other words, though in 871 Oxford seems to have been saved, it
must have fallen afterwards into their power, and further, like London,
1 Following Asser, who writes, • post incendia urbium, stragesque populorum
Londoniam civitatem honorifice restauravit, et habitabilem fecit.' Asser, sub anno.
Mm. Hist. Brit., p. 489.
■ ' Ecbryht feng to Wesseaxna rice'; A.-S. Chron. 801. 'Cenwulf Mercena Cyning
forth ferde and Ceolwulf feng to rice'; Ibid. 819. ' Wiglaf feng to rice '; Ibid. 829.
' Eft Wlaf feng Miercna rices'; Ibid. 829. ' Feng ^Ethelwuli Ecgbrihting to Wes-
seaxna rice'; Ibid. 836. 'Tha feng yElfred yEthelwulfing to Wesseaxna rice';
Ibid. 871.
3 ' Ceolnoth ocrcebisc. onfeng pallium'; A.-S. Chron. 831, and even of a Pope
succeeding to the Papacy — ' Leo Papa forthferde : and oefter him Stephanus feng
to rice'; Ibid. 814.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 129
been rescued by iElfred and put into the keeping of ^Ethered. Of
London we read of the 'setting in order' in 886, but of Oxford we
find no mention. In all probability Oxford had been restored by
Guthrum's peace in 878, and at that time, when it was expected the
Danes would retire behind the Wsetling Street boundary, there was no
need of fortifying towns so far away ; and that it was not fortified is
shown by the fact that the Danes, in 894, passed up the Thames on their
way to the river Severn presumably without molestation. A fortress
at Oxford would have stopped them, or at least produced a battle
which would probably have been recorded. In 912 the aspect of
affairs was very different, and hence Eadward's vigorous action.
At present the question of London and Oxford only has been con-
sidered, but it will be observed that the Chronicle adds, ' and all the
lands which thereto belonged/ There is reason to think that this
expression means practically the counties of Middlesex and Oxford-
shire ; and Gaimar, as will be observed, takes the passage to mean
this, ' E le pais e le contez ki apendeient as citez!
The exact time of the demarcation of the Mercian shires is doubtful,
but the probability is that the work of Eadward in annexing Mercia
included the division of that kingdom into separate districts, which if
not at once, at least soon afterwards, bore the name of shires. The
districts into which Wessex was divided were already recognized, as
they followed the lines of the old divisions, each division being to all
appearance under the rule of an ealdorman. One of them, however,
at the first mention of it, bore the title of shire, viz. Ham-tun-shire,
and was called so from the town of Hamptun, or, as it is usually
known, Southampton. We first hear of this district in 755, on account
of the ealdorman of it choosing to support the king, while the
other ealdormen of the kingdom had deserted him1. We hear of the
Wilsaetas in the year 800 as fighting under ealdorman Weohstan
against the Mercian Huiccas, at Cynemaeresford (i.e. Kempsford on
the Thames) under ealdorman iEthelmund ; and so again in 878,
when the neighbourhood flocked to the assistance of Alfred, who was
then at ^Ethelney, the chronicler writes, ' there came to meet him all
Somerscete, and Wilscete, and Hamptunscire! In describing the
1 A. S. Chronicle, sub anno. ' The witan deprived the West Saxon King Sige-
bryht of his kingdom except Hamtunscire, and that he held until he slew the
ealdorman who had longest remained with him.' The reason of Hamtun giving its
name to the district may perhaps be connected with the circumstances of a strip of
land being taken in 661 out of Wessex communicating with the port giving access
to the Isle of Wight, although the Meonwara (see Beda iv. cap. 13) possibly
only occupied a portion of what was afterwards the Hamtun-shire.
K
i3o THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
diocese, however, which was probably in 870 coterminous with the
territory of the Wilsaetas, the Bishop is spoken of as < of Wiltumcire;
from the chief town of Wiltun : under 898 this ecclesiastical name
seems to have superseded the civil name of the district, as we read
that ' this year died ^thelm ealdorman of Wiltunscire1.' The Sumer-
scete and the DornscEte2 had already been mentioned as fighting under
their respective ealdormen Eanulph and Osric against the Danes in
their raid up the river Parret in 845.
The De/enas are first referred to in the Chronicle under the year 823,
when they fight the Welsh, and again, under the same title,' in 894 and
897; nevertheless, in 851, 878, and 893, we find the district and the
ealdorman referred to as that of Defena-scire, though no town existed
to give the name, as in the case of Wiltshire. On the other hand, the
Somersjete and the Dornsaete are not found in the Chronicle with
the suffix of 'shire' till after the Conquest. Of the Cornwealas we
do not read in the Chronicle till 891.
The name Bearrucscire occurs as early as the year 860, when the
ealdorman Osric, with Hamtunscire, and ealdorman ^thelwulf 3, with
Bearrucscire, fought against the Danes, who had come up the Itchen
as far as the old Roman town of Winchester, but were put to flight.
Probably the name is derived from the Saxon dearo, and may have
reference to the long line of the Berkshire downs, with Cwichelmshlcewe,
a prominent object, in the midst. Yet it is just possible that the
original name may have contained the name of some tribe of which
all traces are lost 4.
Thus the whole of Wessex proper is shown to be mapped out in
shires before the date of 912, while the kingdoms of Kent and Sussex
date from still earlier times, and of Suthrige or Surrey we hear under
722, as the place of exile of Ealbriht. Further, it is to be noted that
not only these nine several territories, but their very names, survive to
the present day.
1 The country is still called from the town, i.e. Wil-t-shire not Wil-shire. The
t for the moment is suppressed, though not perhaps lost, in the modern Hampshire,
and clearly appears in Hants. ... ». ,>.
» The first mention of the Dornsoete in the Chronicle is in 837, when they fight
against the Danes under their ealdorman, jEthelhelm, at the Isle of Portland, where
the Danes gain the victory and the ealdorman is slain.
3 This was the same /Ethelwulf who successfully prevented the Danes on their
first attempt from reaching ^Escesdun, but who was slain in their second sally forth
from Reading. See ante, p. 115. . *u oA**
* Asser begins his life of Alfred by speaking of Wanating (i.e. Wantage), Alfred s
birthplace, being 'in ilia paga quae nominatur Berrocscire, quae paga taliter vocatur
a Berroc sylva ubi buxus abundantissima nascitur.' Monumenta Hist. Brit. p. 4°7-
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. J31
But as regards the Mercian kingdom on the north of the Thames it
is quite different. The district of the old East Saxons, and the small
territory of the Middle Saxons, still retained their name and probably
much of their old boundaries, as also the two divisions of the East
Anglian kingdom, the North folk and the South folk. The Middle
Angles had probably been absorbed into Mercia on the formation of
that kingdom ; and this and all to the west, reaching up to the Welsh
border, comes before us at the close of the ninth century as one
great shire ruled over by one ealdorman. No doubt originally there
were under-kingdoms, and from the aggregation of these the Mercian
kingdom had been formed ; but so far as appears from the material
left to us, their individuality had been lost, and their boundaries had
been obliterated ; and though here and there some of the old divisions
have left their traces in local nomenclature, they played no part in
the meting out of the new shires, which took place, there is reason to
suppose, in the tenth century1.
It is clear also that ^Ethered held a high position in Mercia before
it was subjected to the West Saxon kingdom, and that it was in conse-
quence of this that ^Elfred had given him his daughter JEthelflaed in
marriage ; but we obtain no hint as to what part of Mercia it was in
which his patrimony lay, or whether he was of royal lineage or not.
In 874 Burhred the actual king of Mercia had been driven out by the
Danes ' beyond sea,' and had died soon after in Rome, whither he
had fled. Ceolwulf, to whom the Danes had committed the kingdom
of Mercia — an unwise king's thane, as the Chronicle calls him — was
probably deposed soon after Alfred's success of 878, when the
treaty was made by which the Danes withdrew beyond the Wsetling
Street, and the former ealdorman (for iEthered seems to have borne
that title while the king Burhred was living2) was restored again to the
dignity — but this time subject to the West Saxon king, who had
delivered the greater part of Mercia from the Danish bondage. It
was not till 886 that we read in the Chronicle that JElfred gives him
1 If for instance we take the district nearest to Oxford, that of the Huiccas,
already named, as possessing an ealdorman so late as the year 800, we can only
suppose that it occupied parts of Gloucestershire and Worcestershire but not the
whole of either : nor would it be unreasonable to suppose that it extended itself
over a portion of Oxfordshire and has left its name in the royal forest of Wych-
wood — referred to in the Domesday Survey. 'In Scotorne . . . et Huichwode
dominicae forestae regis sunt.' fol. 154, verso, col. 2.
2 ' Ethelred Deo adjuvante Merciorum Dux.' K. C. D. No. 304, Vol. ii. p. 99.
Also just after the Guthrum treaty (K. C. D. 311) he defines his title 'Dux et
patricius omnium Merciorum.'
K 2
1 32 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
London in consequence of his position ; and he is still termed ealdor-
man; but, though ealdorman in the sense of being subject to the
king' of Wessex, he had succeeded to the rule, not of a shire, like the
Wessex ealdormen, but as regards extent to that of a kingdom \
Taking these several considerations into account, it may reasonably
be assumed that it was not till Eadward's rule that Mercia was strictly
divided into shires; and further that the annexation of Oxford, < with
all the lands which thereto belonged2,' was an early, if not the earliest
instance of such demarcation on this side of the Thames. From
London being situated in the midst of a district which had acquired
the name of the land of the Middlesaxons, no land was then assigned to
it because it was in the centre of a ' shire ' already, and one which
retained its old name, like Sussex and Essex, and like the 'sate' in
Wessex already referred to.
As has been frequently pointed out, it is the feature which distin-
guishes the Mercian shires from almost all the others, that in them
while the shire is grouped round the town which gives its name to
it, in the others (Hampshire being the chief exception) the chief town
has nothing to do with the name, and the position of it is a matter of
accident. And this view is further supported by the fact that at this
time several of the towns which formed the nucleus of the shire seem
to come into prominence for the first time. Not only, as already
said, is Oxford named in the Chronicle for the first time, no doubt
in consequence of becoming a fortified town on the Thames, but
also in 913 ^Ethelfted, the lady of the Mercians, ordered the burh at
Warwick to be built. The same year she built the burh at Stafford ;
while Eadward ordered the burh to be built at Hertford between the
two rivers; and in 915, at Buckingham, two burhs; and in 919 the
burh at Bedford3; so that in these cases we have definite reference to
the construction of their fortification, in others also it is implied.
All these became shire centres.
1 The two remaining entries in the Chronicle previous to that of 912 con-
cerning him exhibit both sides of his position. On the one hand we hear of him
in 804 as having stood sponsor to one of the sons of the Danish commander,
King Eadward standing godfather to the other ; and on the other, in the same year
fighting against the Danes, in conjunction with the ealdormen of Wiltshire and
°™Under 915 again we find a similar expression regarding two other shire towns,
viz the chief men belonging to Bedford and those belonging to Northampton,
and in the same year (though Chronicle A has it under 918) we read of the ' men
of Hereford and the men of Gloucester.'
3 Bedcanford had already appeared in the pages of the Chronicle, i.e. in 571, as
marking the progress of the Saxon arms against the Brito-Welsh. See ante, p. 82.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 133
In 914, it was from Northampton the Danish army rode to
Leicester; and again, in 921, they broke the peace at Northampton,
and the same year they left the burh at Huntingdon. Then there
were the five burhs 1, four of which became shire towns — Derby and
Leicester, both of which uEthelflsed took in 917, and Nottingham,
which had already as early as 868 formed one of the first strongholds
of the Danes, and which they held till 924, when Eadward drove them
out and commanded the burh to be built on the south side of the
river opposite the other. Lincoln was so far within the Danish lines
that it seems to have played no part at this period, but it is included
in the list of the five burhs freed by the king up to 941.
These towns, then, became centres of districts or shires, and the few
other towns of note were omitted, either from the absence of such
natural advantages as to warrant the expense of fortification, of
else from their proximity to other towns on the same rivers. In
fact, looking at the question as a whole, it would appear as if the
division of Mercia proper into shires arose from the necessity of the
times, and were as much due to the military requirements as to any
political convenience. One point is clear ; whatever the cause, Oxford
stands as to recorded history in the forefront of the Mercian series in
having a shire allotted to it.
It is not easy at this distance of time, and with the little which has
been handed down to us, to attempt to determine on what principles
the shires were mapped out. In all probability, as already said, the old
under-kingdoms of Mercia had long been obliterated, and we cannot
suppose there was anything of the kind to guide the lines of the new
Oxfordshire. The boundary of the Thames, on the south, was of
course natural; but on the eastern side, while one would have expected
the Thame to have marked out, at least roughly, a division, and to
have carried on the tradition, so to speak, of the times when the
Dobuni and Cassivelauni occupied the country, that river is wholly
disregarded. For the northern and western boundary, it would be
only idle to guess at the circumstances which ruled it ; all that can be
said is, that the western boundary starts from the same point where
the division between the Wilsaete and Bearrocscire ends. Taking, how-
ever, a map of this part of England with the roads, railways, canals,
and the like suppressed, and the rivers and hills put into the prominent
1 Under the year 941 the Chronicle introduces their names in a poem. ' Five
towns, Leicester, and Lincoln and Nottingham, so Stamford eke and Derby were
erewhile Danish under the Northmen . . . until again released them . . . Eadmund
King.'
i34 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
position which the others occupy in most maps, there is a certain
system observable in the demarcation, allowing for the circum-
stances of the rivers and hills, and of the position of the several towns
chosen for their importance. The divisions certainly do not seem to
have been left to chance, and, as a rule, allowing for exceptional
circumstances (of which Oxford affords one example), the town is as
nearly as possible in the centre of the shire. One point seems to be
very clear ; the line of demarcation laid down in the Guthrum Peace,
1 up the Thames, and then up the Lea into its source, then right to
Bedford, then up on the Ouse into Wxtling Street,' had no influence
whatever in meting out any of the county boundaries through which
that line ran.
Taking, therefore, all the circumstances into account, it may be
fairly said that the year 912 saw Oxford made a fortified town, with
a definite duty to perform and a definite district assigned to it. From
this time forward Oxfordshire was attached to it as a district, and
Oxford the chief town of the county ; and above and beyond this, at
the same time, this county was definitely incorporated into the kingdom
of Wessex which was now fast merging into the kingdom of England.
Again, whatever may have been the special reason at this time for
fortifying so many places throughout this particular part of the
country (for we hear little or nothing of fortifications in Wessex) cer-
tain it is, as the result showed, they were needed. The peace of 878
must have been of short duration, and excepting that it was made
after a defeat, instead of before, it does not seem to have differed very
much from many others as to its temporary character. But this series
of fortifications had a different effect. The breaking of the peace
afterwards did not mean the horde of Danes ravaging the country; on
the contrary, we find either Eadward or his sister gaining over other
towns which were on the Danish side of the line of the treaty. In 9 1 7,
for instance, ' the Lady of the Mercians, God aiding her/ gains over
Derby, and, in 918, the burh at Leicester with the greatest part of the
army which belongs thereto, becomes subject to her. In 919, Ead-
ward on his part goes to Bedford and gains the town, and in 920
penetrates as far as Essex and takes Maldon, and establishes a 'burh'
there, and, in 921, the same at Towcester, which lies on the Waetling
Street, the line of boundary in this part. And so the vigour of the
king continued. But the result in one respect is unfortunate. Not
only for the rest of Eadward's reign, but to the end of the century,
there is in consequence no record in any of the Chronicles of any
event connecting Oxford with the history of the kingdom. It is true
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 135
the name occurs once, and once only, namely when the death of
Ead ward's son is recorded as taking place there, a few days after his
father's death : —
* a.d. 924. In this year King Eadweard died in Mercia at Farndon x;
iElfweard his son very shortly [about 16 days after] died at Oxford,
and their bodies lie at Winchester2.'
Florence of Worcester has thus followed the above in his Chro-
nicle : —
1 And his (i.e. Edward's) body was carried to Winchester and was
buried in a royal manner in the " New Minster." And not long after
his son Alfward died at Oxenford, and was buried where his father
was V
Henry of Huntingdon gives the above in different words, but the
place of JSlfweard's death is not mentioned by Simeon of Durham or
Geoffrey Gaimar. As will be seen by the note, one half of the
Chronicles omit all reference to .zElfweard, besides which, these make
Eadward's death take place in 925.
King Ead ward had several children ; by his first wife ^thelstan,
who succeeded him, and also Alfred, and a daughter Eadgyth, who
was after his death married to Sihtric, king of Northumbria; by his
second wife two sons, iElfward, above named, and Eadwig. Had the
children of the first wife been illegitimate, JElfward would have been
heir to the throne 4.
The king's presence at Farndon at the time of his death is most
likely to have been by reason of a chance stoppage in the course of one
of his journeys, for it was the habit of kings in those days, as well as
of a period long after the Norman Conquest, to be constantly on the
move. But the death of one of his sons at Oxford, who must have
been comparatively a young man, seems to show that the castle here
was at this time provided with chambers sufficient for a residence for
royalty, as it was in after years when we find several documents
1 Farndon in Northamptonshire, about two miles east of Market Harborough.
The Hyde Chronicle (14th century), which repeats the passage in substance, sup-
poses the place to be Faringdon, for it has ' XII Miliare ab Oxonia distante ad
occidentem ' : but then this Faringdon is on the south side of the Thames, i. e. in
Wessex and not in Mercia.
2 The extract is printed from Chron. B. Chrons. C and D follow it verbatim,
the latter introducing the ' 16 days.' Chrons. A, E, and F omit all reference to
^lfweard. Appendix A, § 40.
3 Florence of Worcester, Chronicon, s. z..Mon. Hist. Br. p. 573. Appendix A, § 41.
* A legend is told which makes her his concubine, but the succession of .^Ethel-
Stan without opposition seems to negative the story. The circumstance of the
marriage of Eadgyth, ^Ethelstan's sister, to the King of Northumbria — a marriage
no doubt prompted by political reasons — tells also somewhat against it.
136 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
relating to the king's chambers within the castle precincts. Further
than this, it may be surmised that, Oxford being an important post,
when Eadward was assigning the charge of the different fortified
towns to nobles he could trust, he put that place under the custody of
his son JElfweard, and that while acting as lord over Oxford he died
there l. We learn but little of him. William of Malmesbury seems
to have collected what he could about Eadward's family, and in the
course of his summary he incidentally refers to him : —
* By the illustrious Lady Egvvin he had Athelstan his firstborn ; also
a daughter of whose name I have not at hand any note ; this was the
one her brother gave in marriage to Sihtric, King of the Northum-
brians. Edward's second son was Ethelward, by Elfled, daughter of
earl Ethelm, thoroughly versed in literature, and much resembling his
grandfather Alfred both in appearance and manners; but he was taken
off by death soon after that of his father V
That the father elected to be buried at Winchester and not in
Mercia, is but natural, since, after all, he was primarily King of Wessex,
and the church at Winchester had been once the cathedral church,
when Wessex was but one diocese. But more than this, JGlfred his
father had been buried there before him, and still more Alfred had
commenced the foundation of the new Minster ; and as Eadward him-
self had completed the foundation, it is probable that Florence of
Worcester is right in saying that he was buried in the ' New Minster.'
It is, however, by no means certain that he had any authority for this.
The Hyde Abbey Chronicle has the same statement, which, as already
said, may in several of its parts be based upon some Register still
existing in the Abbey in the fourteenth century, though its value as an
authority is much diminished by the interpolation of much from
Ralph Higden and other later chroniclers.
The vigorous policy of King Eadward as regards Mercia seems to
have been carried on by his three sons who succeeded him, namely
1 The circumstance of a King's son dying at Oxford, and one who was pro-
nounced learned, was too good a point to be passed over by those who argued for
the antiquity of the University. The passage in Antony a Wood will be suffi-
cient to quote, 'A. D. 913. About this time the King showed so much favour toward
the University, that he sent his son named TElfward or Elfward ; where profiting in
letters he became eminently learned.' Hist, and Ant. ed. 1 792, vol. i. p. 115. There
is some reason, however, to suspect that the learning attributed to JElfweard arises
from a confusion between Eadward's son and Alfred's son. The latter is mentioned
by Asser as ludis Hteraria discipline traditus {A/on. Hist. Br. p. 485) ; and a
passage in the Hyde Abbey Chronicle (Rolls Series, p. 126) may be compared with
that of Kudburn, already quoted. See ante, p. 49.
2 William of Malmesbury, Gcsta Regum Anglorum> lib. II, § 226. Engl. Hist.
Soc. vol. i. p. 197. Appendix A, § 42.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 137
JEthelstan (925-940), his eldest son; Eadmund (940-946), the eldest
by his third wife ; and Eadred (946-955), another son by the same
wife. The Danes seem to have desisted from their attacks while this
policy lasted, and though the Northumbrians under a king by name
Olaf revolted and carried their arms as far as Tamworth, in 943, the
energetic and decisive action of Eadmund soon put an end to the raid,
he making himself at once master of the ' five burhs,' as is told in a
poem introduced into the Chronicle, where the event is described.
On the death of Eadred, however, serious troubles impended. It
would seem that old fires were still burning, and ready to burst out
when least expected. Mercia chose one successor to the throne,
Wessex another. Eadgar, the second son of Eadmund was chosen by
Mercia, but Wessex preferred Eadwig, the son of Edred. In some
way, however, the political difficulty was surmounted by the Witan ;
Eadwig succeeded, and after five years' reign, is in turn succeeded by
Eadgar. Otherwise Oxford would have been again a border town,
and would with its shire have had to elect whether to join the Mer-
cians, in which territory it lay for the longer part of its history, or
Wessex, to which it had been annexed by Eadward.
But these divisions were the beginning of the end. Political intrigues
were rife. Eadward the Martyr, who succeeded in 975, was murdered
at Corfe-gate in 979, as it is said, by his stepmother JElfthryth (who, it
may be mentioned, was a benefactress to Abingdon Abbey1), and his
successor, iEthelred II, had not been two years on the throne before the
Danes, perceiving the change in affairs, and the weakness caused in the
government by internal feuds, began their incursions again. History
repeated itself so exactly that the chronicler seems as if he had gone
back, and was beginning the story of the last hundred and fifty years
over again. Beginning in Thanet on the east, and Cheshire in the
north, the next year the Danes are ravaging the coasts of Devon and
Cornwall. In 832 they ravage Dorsetshire about Portland, and so on,
till emboldened, just as was the case before, they came up the
Thames2. This was in 993, and they seem at present only to have
reached as far as Staines. The circumstances of their reaching
Oxford belongs to another century and another chapter. Before
passing, however, to this chapter, it is thought well to take a rapid
glance at some points in the ecclesiastical history of the district.
The diocesan history is so meagre and so obscure that, though
1 It is probable that her name was given to the little c iElfthryth die,' which
was the boundary ditch separating Fyfield from Tubney in 968, and is so now.
2 Compare the Danish landings referred to at the beginning of the chapter, p. 1 13.
138 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Archbishop Theodore is accredited with having partitioned Mercia into
dioceses, we hear little or nothing of Dorchester since the appointment
of iF/.la ahead)- referred to l. At times it may have been the seat of a
bishoprick, but the chief 'stool' for the district seems to have been
at Leicester during both the ninth and tenth centuries. William of
Malmcsbury in his Gesta Pontificuni 2 professes to have compiled a
list of those of Dorchester, but the first nine are those of Lindsey,
and had probably no connection with Dorchester : his list of
Leicester bishops, however, undoubtedly had, and they are given as
follows — Totta, Edberht, Unwona, Werenberht, Rethune, Aldred,
and Ceoldred. All of these names, excepting Aldred (which is
probably only a misreading of the next), are found in correct suc-
cession amongst signatures to charters between 737 and 869, but they
are not mentioned in any of the Chronicles so as to bring the diocese
into prominence. Fe then omits Alheard, Ceolwulf, Winsy, and
Oskytel, who were certainly Bishops of Leicester if not all of Dor-
chester as well. Their signatures range between 898 and 956. Of
none of them is there any mention in the Chronicles, except that
Oskytel is said to have been hallowed in 949 as ' Suffragan-Bishop
of Dorchester3' before he was hallowed Archbishop of York. His
signatures extend to 956 ; but under the year 954 one of the
Chronicles has, ' in this year Archbishop Wulstan again succeeded to
the bishopric at Dorchester 4? Leofwin, whose signatures range from
953 t0 965, appears also as Bishop of Lindsey, as well as Leicester;
and William of Malmcsbury remarks that ' in the time of Eadgar
[959-973] he joined the two bishoprics.' The signatures of Elnod
(written usually Eadnoth) and Escwin range between 965 and 1002,
but these two bishops add nothing to the history of the diocese.
From the early charters of S. Frideswide being lost we know no more
of the history of that foundation between the time of its establishment
and the restoration of the lands in 1002 (which belongs to the next
chapter) than the summary beginning ' Notandum quod Didanus ' sup-
plies ; and in that a line will be noticed to the following effect : —
1 Some time after the glorious death of S. Frideswide, the Nuns
having been taken away, secular canons were introduced V
1 Sec ante, p. 87.
2 William of Malmesbnry, Gcsta Pontijicum, Rolls Series, p. 311.
8 See Chronicles B and C, sub anno, 971, ' Se woes ccrest to Dorkeceastre to
leod-bisceope gehalgod.'
4 Chron. D, sub anno : ' Wulstan Arcebiscop onfeng eft biscoprices on Dorce-
ceastre.' He was Oskytel's predecessor at York, and had been banished. There
may be hence some confusion. His name occurs in no list of Bishops of Dorchester.
6 Already given from the Ch. Ch. Chartulary, ante, p. 92.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INCURSIONS. 139
The question is, had the writer any grounds whatever for the state-
ment beyond the charter of King ^Ethelred in which that king is
made to say that ' he has recovered the lands which belonged to the
said monastery ? ' The word arcisterio would apply to a nunnery as
well as to a monastery, and it might have remained a nunnery till its
destruction. On the other hand, it is quite possible that the nuns had
left and that the lands of the nunnery had been transferred to some
' secular canons,' and that the tradition only survived ; if so, the
further question arises did they remain secular, or were they turned
out by iEthelwold ? It must be remembered that the superiority of
secular or regular canons was then the great ecclesiastical question of
the day, and yEthelwold, Bishop of Winchester (who was as energetic
as his leader Archbishop Dunstan himself in the promotion of monas-
ticism), had been raised to the episcopate in 963 from the neigh-
bouring Abbey of Abingdon, where he was then ruling as abbot.
That abbey must have been at the time in a flourishing condition,
though it had suffered much, as we learn, from the Danish incursions in
jElfred's reign, when S. Frideswide's may have suffered also. We learn
by one of the Chronicles1 that^Ethelwold, in the same year in which he
became bishop, begged of King Eadgar ' to give him all the monas-
teries which heathen men had before ruined, because that he would
restore them ; and the king blithely granted it.' The chronicler, how-
ever, only names two, namely Ely and Peterborough, which he so
restored ; but if S. Frideswide's had suffered from the first series of
Danish incursions as it did in the second, and the foundation with
which ^Ethelwold, while abbot of Abingdon, must have been familiar,
was amongst the number given to him, we may be sure that he would
have put in regulars and not seculars. At the same time, under
the year 975, we find mention in three of the Chronicles of an
ealdorman of Mercia, by name iElfhere, destroying the monasteries
which ^thelwold had restored : —
'iElfthere ealdorman, and others many, the monkish rule obstructed,
and monasteries destroyed, and monks expelled, and God's servants
persecuted V
This exaggerated language probably only means that the monks
were turned out and the original secular priests restored; it is just
possible, therefore, that S. Frideswide's was first occupied by secular
canons, then by monks in 963, and then again by secular canons in
975. There is another passage, also introduced into the Cartulary,
in reference to the turning out and then the restoration of the
1 A. S. Chronicle, E. sub anno 963. 2 Ibid. Chrons. D. E. F. sub anno 975.
140 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
seculars, purporting however to belong to a later period : this will
be best considered further on in its place1.
But there is one event which is recorded as having occurred at this
time at a place which there seems every reason to identify with Kirt-
lington near to Oxford, and which may therefore be here noticed. The
Chronicles B and C under the year 977 have the following: —
'This year after Easter (Ap. 8) was the great "gemot " ( = Council)
at Kyrtlingtun ; and there died Bishop Sideman by sudden death, on
the 2nd of the Kal. of May (Ap. 30). He was Bishop of Devonshire,
and he desired that his body's resting place might be at Crediton at
his Episcopal see. Then commanded King Eadward and Archbishop
Dunstan that he should be conveyed to S. Mary's Monastery which is
at Abingdon, and so it was also done ; and he is also honourably buried
on the north side of S. Paul's Porch.'
The subjects which were debated at this council have not been
handed down to us, or any list of those who were present ; but the
death of the bishop of Crediton shows that the bishops of the country
had attended from some distance. It would appear also that the
king and the archbishop were present. The question naturally arises,
why should they not have held the council in Oxford itself? Further,
why should they not have buried Bishop Sideman at S. Frideswide's if
that monastery had been restored, and was in a flourishing condition ?
The body no doubt, when carried to its resting-place, would enter
Oxford by the northern road already mentioned; it would pass the
very gates of S. Frideswide's, and out through the south gate of the
town, and over the river by the ford, and thence on to Abingdon 2. •
On the whole then, from the negative evidence, although it must be
admitted such is not satisfactory, we must assume that S. Frideswide's
was not in a flourishing condition. It existed as a monastery, and
some of the buildings were no doubt standing, as we hear of the
church at the beginning of the next century; and if we accept William
of Malmesbury's version of the story, it had a tower into which, as
will be seen in the next chapter, certain Danish fugitives took refuge.
1 See post, Chapter IX. p. 166.
2 Of course it is possible that the corpse may have been conveyed by water, for
the Cherwell passes near to Kirtlington, or it may have been transferred on to a
boat at Oxford. But on the whole the road journey would be the more probable.
The north porch of St. Paul would mean the apse either at the east end of the
northern aisle or on the eastern side of the northern transept. It is not certain
whether the church existing at this time was on the site of the large twelfth century
church afterwards erected : that stood in what are now Mr. Trendell's private
grounds at Abingdon, though not a single stone of the vast building has been left
in situ. In all probability it was south of this, namely within the precincts of
Mr. Morland's brewery.
CHAPTER VIII.
Oxford during the Danish Invasion in the early
part of the Eleventh Century.
The reign of Ethelred II, which brought the tenth century to a
close, and with which the eleventh century opens, was perhaps the
saddest of any which England had yet seen. The long thirty-seven
years seem to have been fraught with disasters throughout. The
name ' Unready/ commonly applied to the sovereign, though in its
true signification it meant 'badly counselled/ or perhaps without
counsel at all, might have been justly applied in its modern significa-
tion as regards his meeting the attacks of the Danes; rash and impro-
vident, he seems to have exerted energy when not wanted, and never
to have been ready when it was wanted. For the first twenty years
the inland parts were not threatened, but this seems not to have been
from the Danes fearing the valour of the English people, but from
Ethelred buying them off when they made raids upon the coast,
and obtained a footing in any town. It seemed to be a continuous
policy of yielding for the sake of peace at one moment, and resorting
to any method to get over some difficulty the next.
The year 1002 saw an example of this latter policy which was as
wicked, if not as foolish a one as could well be devised. The king
seems to have issued an edict throughout the country to all the
ealdormen and reeves to have the Danes massacred on a certain day,
wherever they were found — not those in arms only but the peaceful,
and there is some reason to suppose the women and children also.
The Chronicle runs : —
'a.d. 1002. . . . And in that year the king commanded all the
Danish men who were in England to be slain. This was done on the
Mass-day of S. Bricius ; because it had been made known to the king
that they would plot against his life, and afterwards those of all his
witan, and then have his realm without any gainsaying V
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, C, D, E, F, sub anno. Appendix A, § 43.
142 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Passing by the somewhat feeble excuse which the chronicler makes
for the infamous act, it is only necessary to note how it affected
Oxford. The Chronicles are wholly silent as to the result of the
edict, and we do not know whether it was generally carried out or
not; but we have remaining transcripts of an important charter, of
which some account has already been given on a previous page l,
which shows that in Oxford not only the Danes suffered, but also
the religious foundation of S. Frideswide's.
1 In the Year of our Lord 1004, in the second indiction and in the
twenty-fifth year of my reign, according to the disposal of God's
providence, I ASelred ruling over the whole of Albion have for the
love of the Almighty established with liberty of charters and by royal
authority a certain monastery situate in the city which is called
Oxoneford, where the body of St. Frideswide reposes, and have
recovered the lands which belonged to the said monastery of Christ
by the restoration of this new book [of charters] and for all those
who shall look upon this page I will recount by means of very few
words the reason why this was done. For it is certain enough that it
must be very well known to all inhabitants of this country that since
there was issued a certain decree made by me with the advice of my
nobles and princes, that all the Danes who had risen up in this island
by increase like tares amidst the wheat should be slain by a most just
destruction. And this decree was carried into effect to the very
death; but whatever Danes were living in the aforesaid city in
attempting to save themselves from death, entering this Sanctuary
of Christ, breaking by force the doors and bolts determined therein
that what was a refuge for themselves, should become a fortress
against the inhabitants of the city, both those who lived within and
without the wall (urbanos <vel suburbanos). But when the people in
pursuit of them compelled by necessity strove to eject them, and
could not, having thrown fire upon the planks [of the roof] they
burnt this church, as it seems, together with the ornaments and the
books.
'Afterwards with the help of God, it is now restored by myself, and
by my subjects, and as I have before said, having retained all its
customs entire by the dignity of charters which for the honour of
Christ have been confirmed together with all the territories adjoining,
and with every liberty granted both as to royal as well as ecclesiastical
dues.
1 But if by chance it should happen at any time that any one of
unsound mind 2>
1 See ante, page 91. As the first part refers to the foundation of S. Frideswide's
in 727, and the last belongs more especially to the present date, it has been thought
well to divide it, a few lines however at the beginning of the charter being repeated.
2 Ex Cartulario S. FriJeswidae. The passage will be found in Appendix A,
§ 29.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. T43
It will be convenient before considering the political aspect of the
massacre to complete the description of the charter and to add such
other evidence as bears upon the event. The charter ends with one
of the usual anathemas, which, apart from defying translation into
English, is of no special interest *,
Next, in the larger chartulary of S. Frideswide's, namely that pre-
served in Christ Church, a series of boundaries of lands are inscribed,
which have the appearance of being copied from those attached to
the original boundaries, but which in the process of transcription
have been somewhat altered, the transcriber sometimes misreading
the original, at others substituting his own readings.
The first plot of land named is that of Winchendon of ten hydes.
It agrees exactly with what is found in the Domesday Survey of 1086
under Terra Canonicorum Oxeneford 2 in the county of Buckingham-
shire. It is evidently to be identified with the Nether Winchendon of
the map, which lies on the banks of the river Thame, about four
miles north-east of the town of Thame, and four miles south-west of
Aylesbury : since ' along Thame stream ' occurs as a portion of the
boundary of the land in question.
The second plot of land named is that of Whithull, consisting of
three hydes. As it seems to lie between the Port-strete and the Cher-
well, it may perhaps be assigned to the land at the south of Tackley
where Whitehill farm still preserves the name ; it would therefore lie
several miles to the north of Oxford. There is nothing amongst the
lands in the Domesday Survey to assist in the identification, and it
cannot well be included under the four hydes mentioned as belonging
to the monastery in the neighbourhood of Oxford.
The third plot which appears to have been given, or which, if we
believe the charter literally, was restored to the monastery, has the title
of Bolles, Covele, and Hedington, that is of Bullingdon, Cowley, and
Headington. It is described as of three hydes, and as the circuit
starts from Cherwell bridge, and as Ziflele, i.e. Iffley, is named amongst
the boundaries, we may conclude it occupied a large tract to the
East of Oxford. This probably is included in the iiij hydes which the
Canons of S. Frideswide's held of the king ljuxta Oxeneford '; and the
1 It will however be found printed in the Appendix, with the rest of the charter.
Appendix A, § 29.
2 Domesday Survey, folio 146 a. The other Winchendon in the Survey occurs
under the lands belonging to Walter Gifard, folio 147 a, col. 2, and is to be identi-
fied with the manor, and so with the parish of Upper Winchendon, which lies high
up on the hill.
144 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
difference between the three and the four hydes may be that the latter
includes the land on which the monastery itself was built, and the
' curia ' thereto belonging. The fourth plot, consisting of two hydes,
was in Cutslow ; this is duly entered in the Domesday Survey as of
two hydes1, and the name is still found as that of a farm, on the north-
eastern side of Oxford ; like the rest the boundaries are of uncertain
identification. The fifth paragraph consists of a recital of the liberties
of S. Frideswide's, and these amongst other general customs include
the tithing of Headington, at which latter place it will be observed that
the charter is supposed to be signed. It is called a ' royal vill,' but
whether that involves the king having a definite residence there may
be open to question.
That this series of boundaries are copied from genuine documents
by the transcriber of the S. Frideswide cartulary, there is no valid
reason to doubt, nor will it be disputed that they belong substan-
tially to the year 1004. S. Frideswide's, therefore, though in com-
parison with that of the neighbouring Abingdon Monastery, it was a
poor foundation, held considerable properly as the total of eighteen
hydes testifies.
The entries conclude with a list of the signatures attached to the
charter as follows : —
This schedule was written by command of the aforesaid king in the
royal vill, which is called Hedyndon, on the day of the octaves of
S. Andrew the apostle [i.e. Dec. 7] with the consent of these chief
men who appear written beneath.
I, Etheldred, King of the English, have granted this charter to the
aforesaid with perpetual liberty in the name of Christ.
I, Alfrich, Archbishop of the church of Canterbury, have corrobo-
rated the same under anathema.
I, Wulfstan, Archbishop of the city of York, have confirmed it.
I, Elfgifu, the royal spouse, have honoured this gift.
I, Athelstan, the eldest of the royal family, together with my brother,
was kindly present as a witness.
I, Alfean, Prelate of Venta, have subscribed thereto.
I, Alstan, Bishop of the church of Wells, thereto have confirmed it.
I, Alfun, Bishop of the church of London, have consecrated it.
I, Godwine, Bishop of the church of Lichfield, have secured it.
I, Orbyrht, Bishop of the South Saxons, have concluded it.
I, Ethelrich, Bishop of the church of Sherborne, have consented.
I, Alfwod, Bishop of the church of Crediton, have revived it.
1 The Domesday Survey under 'Land of the Canons of Oxford and of other
clerks' gives four hydes near Oxford, and two hydes at Cutslow. The other lands
under the same head are those of the clerks, and apparently have nothing to do
with S. Frideswide.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 145
I, Alfric, ealdorman. I, iElfgar, earl.
I, Leofwyne, ealdorman. I, Goda, thane.
I, Wulfgar, abbot. I, iEthelwerd, earl.
I, Alsigge, abbot. I, Athlwyne, earl.
I, Athelmer, earl. 1, Ordmere, earl.
I, Ordulf, earl. I, Leofwyne, earl.
I, JEthelmer, earl. I, Godwyne, earl.
I, iElric, earl. &c, as in the aforesaid codicil.
Without entering into many details which a survey of these wit-
nesses suggest, such as their rank, their style and title, or the
fanciful mode of signature, no doubt due to the ingenuity of the clerk
who drew up the charter1, it is important to consider their bearing
upon the date. It may be said generally that a correlation of the whole
series as far as dates are known agrees very well indeed with the date
in the body of the charter2. Consequently there are none of the
difficulties which so constantly beset the historian in assigning the date
1 It will be observed that there are besides the King, eleven Prelates, the
Queen (the expression used is ' thoro consecrata regio '), the king's eldest son
^Ethelstan, two nobles with the titles of ' dux* (which has been translated 'eal-
dorman'), nine with the title of 'comes'' (which has been translated earl), one
minister (translated 'thane'), and two abbots.
2 The following are the dates which should tally with 1004. Ethelred the King,
979-1016 : JEUgifu must be Emma, the second wife, who came over from Nor-
mandy in 1002 according to the Chronicles C,D,E, F, during Lent (that is, some
six months before the edict was issued for the massacre of the Danes), and who seems
to have assumed on her marriage the name of yElfgifu, the first wife not signing
apparently any charter whatever, the queen- mother yElfthyth signing throughout
either as regina or as mater regis. In one charter, dated 1002 (K. D. D. No. 1296),
we have the signature ^Elfgifu conlaterana regis, but as the same form occurs in
1005 and after, it must belong to ^Elfgifu-Emma, though occasionally she signs also
as Queen. That ^Ethelstan was the eldest son is borne out by signatures in some
twenty charters or more, where his name comes before that of his three or four
brothers. His style is sometimes filius regis, sometimes clito. The first time his
signature appears is perhaps in 988 (K. C. D. 666) and with the title of primus, his
brothers not being mentioned ; but if so, ^Ethelred must have married very young.
On his not succeeding to the throne instead of his brother Eadmund see Freeman's
Norman Conquest, vol. i. 3rd edition, 1877, Appendix SS, p. 685. Elfric, Arch-
bishop of Canterbury 990-1005. Wulstan, Archbishop of York 1003-1023.
Ethelric, Bishop of Sherborne 1002-1009. Elfwold, Bishop of Crediton 988-1008.
Elphege (more correctly perhaps spelt ^Elfeah), Bishop of Winchester 984-1005.
Elfstan, Bishop of Wells 990-1012. Alfun or Elfwin, Bishop of London 1004-
1012. Godwin, Bishop of Lichfield 1004-1008. Ordbryht, Bishop of Sussex
(i.e. Selsey) 989-1009. The above dates are taken from the valuable Registrum
Sacrum Anglicanum. As to the ealdormen and earls the material for identification
is very slight, as there are often more than one bearing the same name. Probably
Alfric was the ealdorman slain at the battle of Assandun in 1016, while Leofwyne
was probably ealdorman of the Huiccas, who seems to have succeeded to Mercia
in 1017, &c. &c. There are few if any names in the list which are not also found
elsewhere about this date. Finally the second Indiction agrees with the date of 1004.
146
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
to a charter, when the copyists have combined signatures to the con-
firmation charter and those of the original into one series.
In giving William of Malmesbury's account of the foundation of
S. Frideswide's l, in the Gesta Ponitficum, the continuation of the
passage was omitted. It is continued as follows : —
1 In the time of King Ethelred, however, when the Danes, being con-
demned to death, had taken refuge in the monastery, they as well as
the buildings, were through the insatiable rage of the English destroyed
by fire. But soon the repentance of the king caused to be built for
them a purified shrine and a restored monastery; their lands were
given back, and fresh possessions added V
When William of Malmesbury treats the subject in his history of
the kings, he makes a singular error. He has transferred the burning
of the church with the Danes in it to some nine years after the date of
the charter (which it will be remembered recites the event as having
already taken place), and further connects the burning of S. Frideswide
with an event which took place in Oxford of another kind, which will
have to be discussed later on. The passage runs : —
'The year following [i.e. 1015] a great council of Danes and of
English assembled at Oxford, and there the king [Ethelred] com-
manded Sigeferd and Morcard, the chief nobles amongst the Danes,
to be killed, under a pretence of treason which had been charged
against them by the treachery of Edric. Deceiving them by his
friendly advances, he had enticed them into his private chamber {tri-
clinium), and when they had been made to drink deeply by his
servants, who were expressly charged to this effect, he put an end to
their lives. The reason of this murder was said to be that he desired
their property. Their servants were determined to revenge the death
of their lords, but were repulsed by force, and driven into the tower
of the church of S. Frideswide. And as they could not turn them out,
they were burnt by fire. But soon, by the King's penitence, the stain
was blotted out; the holy place was repaired. I have read this in
writing, which is preserved in the Archives of that Church as a proof
of the fact3.'
It must first be claimed that there are not likely to have been two
burnings of the same church from Danes taking refuge there, within so
short a period, and both recorded in the archives. We have moreover
a copy of the very charter to which William of Malmesbury refers, and
which he duly quotes in his Gesta Pontificum, and that clearly ascribes
the burning to the massacre on S. Brice's day. It is therefore obviously
1 See ante, p. 94. The few words connecting the two passages are repeated.
2 W. Malmesbury, Gesta Pontifnum Angl. lib. iv. § 78. Rolls Series, 1870,
p. 316. See Appendix A, § 30.
3 W. Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Angl. lib. ii. § 179, Eng. Hist. Society's ed.
London, 1840, vol. i. p. 297. Appendix A, § 44.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 147
a blunder on his part in taking or reading the notes which he made
for his history. But though it is a blunder, the passage ought not to
be at once dismissed. It shows so admirably how a chronicler com-
piles his Chronicle. He has (as will be shown afterwards) an account
of two thanes being enticed by Eadric into a chamber and slain.
How was this to be connected with the burning of a number of Danes
in the tower of the church ? His ingenuity is admirable : he invents
the fact of the servants of the thanes desiring to avenge the deaths of
their two lords, and that it was these who took refuge in the tower
and so were burnt. It shows how cautious one ought to be in ac-
cepting the additions to the original chronicles made by successive
chroniclers.
Henry of Huntingdon does not mention Oxford in recounting the
circumstance of the massacre of the Danes, probably not having seen
the S. Frideswide charter; but he writes as follows : —
' The king being elated with pride, secretly ordered all the Danes
to be treacherously murdered on one and the same day, that is to say
on the festival of S. Britius. And of this piece of wickedness, / in my
youth heard some very old people speak, how the King sent secret letters
to each city, in accordance with which, on the same day and at the
same hour, the English either killed all the Danes who were unpre-
pared, with swords, or having suddenly seized them burned them
with fire V
It is not improbable that the story he had heard of the massacre
was the Oxford story, as it will be shown further on that he had a
friend in Oxford who might have told him of the tradition of the place.
The burning by fire was at least a very rare form of capital punish-
ment at this time, even if any example could be found; but the Danes
being burned in the tower of S. Frideswide would be just the kind of
story which wrould be handed down with horror, and which would
become transformed into the shape in which Henry narrates it.
It is very singular that, so far as has been observed, no other
example of a single massacre on S. Brice's Day has been recorded
than this one at Oxford, and it will be seen that we only obtain that
through the chance circumstance of the charter of King Ethelred
having been preserved. It is perhaps too much to hope that Oxford
was the only place where the edict was put into force.
Having seen the manner in which William of Malmesbury compiles
his Chronicle, there is no reliance to be placed upon the detail which
he gives of the Danes having taken refuge in a tower, which differs
1 Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, Rolls Series, 1879, p. 174.
Appendix A, § 45.
L %
i4S THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
from that given in the charter. It is quite possible that S. Frideswide
had a tower, and it is just possible it may have been of wood, and so
easily burnt ; but it is more likely that the Danes had taken refuge in the
church itself, as a place of sanctuary : if this were so, the fury of the
mob would pay no attention to it ; they would throw torches on the
boarded roof, covered perhaps with wooden shingles, which would soon
catch alight, and falling down within the walls of the church, would
either suffocate the fugitives, or compel them to rush out and meet
their fate.
At any rate it was a horrible as well as discreditable business, and
it is a great misfortune that Oxford was the scene of such an event,
and the more so as it is the only place we find connected with the
edict; it is, too, only the second event which has brought Oxford
prominently forward in history.
How far the events of the next few years may have been the results of
the revenge to which the Danes would be naturally aroused, cannot be
determined; nor is it known whether Exeter had been the scene of
crime like Oxford or not. Certain however it is, that early the next year
Exeter was entered by the Danes, and, as would appear, through the
treachery of the reeve appointed by the Norman Lady Emma, Ethelred's
second wife. The ealdorman ^Elfric, pretending illness at a critical
moment, also treacherously allowed the Danes, under the command of
Sweyn, to sack Wiltun and Salisbury and to return safely to their ships.
In East Anglia, however, matters went differently, when the following
year Sweyn landed on the coast ; but Ulfkytel seems not to have
been able to assemble the whole country, and so they got away
again, though with no plunder, as it would appear, but with great loss
of men. In the year 1005 all we find recorded is that a great famine
spread over the land; but in 1006 the Danes came again from the
Isle of Wight, straight up Hampshire, and so to their old quarters at
Reading. The few words of the Chronicle are as eloquent as brief:—
< 1006. And then at the midwinter they went to their ready farm :
out through Hampshire into Berkshire to Reading, and there they did
their old wont; they lighted their war beacons wherever they went.
Then went they to Wallingford, and that all burned ; and were then
one day in Cholsey ; and they went then along JEscesdun to Cwichelms-
hloewe, and there abode as a daring boast ; for it had been often said
that if ever they should reach Cwichelmshloewe they would never
again get to the sea. Then they went homewards another way1.'
One hundred and thirty-five years had elapsed since the Danes
came to Reading on the occasion already recorded. History so far
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, C, D, E, sub anno. Appendix A, § 46.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 149
repeated itself that, then and now, they aimed at making themselves
masters of that long range of Berkshire hills known as iEscesdun, to
which reference has already frequently been made, and reaching
Cwichelmshloewe, the central spot marked by the clump of trees,
which is so prominent an object on the horizon, as seen by any one
mounting to the top of Cumnor hill l.
In 871 they failed to reach the coveted spot. In 1006, as far as
we can judge, they marched thither without hindrance. Now there
was no ealdorman ^Ethelwulf to bar the road at Englefield — no army
surrounding their fortress at Reading, through which they had to
cut their way— no Alfred and ^thelred to meet them in the early
dawn, when they had gained the top of the hill, and then to disperse
them in all directions 2. There was still an iEthelred ruling, but how
different a king! If on that morning in 871 the Danes had gained
a start along the Icknield Way, they would have reached Cwichelms-
hloewe before the English caught them up, and the results might
have been very different. In 1006 all we hear of iEthelred the Second
is, that he was away in Shrewsbury, probably little recking of the ruin
which his long-continued policy of procrastination, compromise, and
finally retreat, was bringing upon the country.
On this occasion the Danes did not cross the Thames. They had
probably no means with them ; and further, having found their ' ready
farm ' at Wallingford and Cholsey, had as much as they could carry
away with them over the hills 'another way' — that is, they avoided
Reading ; but in their journey southward they still had to fight a
small army on crossing the river Kennet before they reached the sea.
After this the same policy is again followed. To quote the words
of the chronicler, ' then was there so great awe of the Danish army
that no man could think or devise how they should be driven out
from the land, or this country held against them ; for they had cruelly
marked every shire in Wessex with burning and with harrying.'
Then we read that the king sent to the army and ' directed it to be
made known to them that he would there should be peace between
them, and that tribute should be paid and food given them.' At one
moment fighting recklessly, at the next offering terms — no wonder
that the successive years saw increasing numbers coming to this
1 It is necessary to walk a short distance along the road past the brick-kilns,
to where it bifurcates, one branch leading into Cumnor village ; the whole range of
^Escesdun, stretching as far as the White-horse Hill, here bursts into view bounding
the southern horizon. The clump of trees marking Cwichelmshloewe is seen on the
left ; that seen in the distance on the far right, and due west, is the clump on the
top of the old 'burh' at Faringdon. 2 See ante, p. 114.
150 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
country. England, having lost its prestige, every northern nation
found men who thought it worth their while to come over ; for pro-
bably the term ' Denisc ' and ' heathen army ' included more than the
inhabitants of the little island of Denmark. In 1007, thirty-six thou-
sand pounds was paid to the army, and Eadric, who had been one of
the worst of the counsellors, by whom the ' unready ' king was ' coun-
selled,' was promoted to high office in the kingdom, and made ealdor-
man of Mercia. This was another step in the wretched policy of the
king ; and in its results, as will be seen, it concerns Oxford.
In 1009 an attempt seems to have been made to meet the Danes
on their landing and a really vigorous policy to be initiated. But
again Eadric counselled the king, and his brother Brihtric accused
Wulfnoth the South Saxon of treason ; under pretence of seizing him,
he kept the ships away that should be doing service to the country.
The Danes came, some landing on the eastern coast, some on the
southern. Those who came to the latter ravaged Hampshire and
Berkshire — 'as their wont is,' writes the contemporary chronicler.
Thurkill's army, which had found comfortable winter quarters in Kent,
after S. Martin's Mass day ' fought against London, but praise be to
God that it yet stands sound.'
The Chronicle continues : —
1009. ' And then, after Midwinter, they took an upward course, out
through Chiltern, and so to Oxford, and burned that town, and then
took their way, on both sides of the Thames, towards their ships V
The several chroniclers who follow the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle do not
vary the story materially.
Florence of Worcester, making the date 10 10, writes : —
1 In the month of January the army of the Danes, leaving their
ships, go to Oxford through the woods of Chiltern, and sack the town,
and set it on fire, and so in going back they carry on their ravages on
both sides of the Thames2.'
Henry of Huntingdon merely says, 'After Christmas the Danes
went by Chiltern to Oxford, returning to their ships after they had
burned it'; and Simeon of Durham and Roger of Hoveden follow
Florence of Worcester verbatim.
The army of the Danes had, after their attack upon London, which
1 The extract is from Chron. C. Chron. A, now written by later hands, has
become very meagre, and Chron. B ceases entirely with the year 977. Chrons.
D and E follow the above with little variation. Appendix A, § 47.
2 Florence of Worcester, Ckroiiicon, printed in Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 586.
Appendix A, § 48.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 151
had proved a failure, marched up the Thames. The usual route was
on the southern side, but they marched along an unusual route, thus
avoiding Reading, and over the Chiltern hills. In all probability the
rush upon Oxford was sudden ; and it will be observed that Florence
of Worcester paraphrases the words ' out through Chiltern ' by per
saltum qui diciiur Chiltern. Instead of the few scattered woods which
we now see on the sides of the Chiltern Hills, there was probably
a kind of belt of continuous woodland, making a vast forest, which
would have concealed their movements \ Whether from having seen
the spot, or from the description of those who had, the paraphrase of
Florence brings before us the secrecy and suddenness of the raid.
The Mercian ealdorman, as might have been expected, remained
inactive. No resistance seems to have been offered at Dorchester, or
anywhere along the route, and therefore they made straight for Oxford.
The danger of such incursions had been foreseen by Edward the Elder
a century previously, but it is probable that Ethelred's ' unready ' rule
had allowed the fortifications to be neglected, and the chief defences,
which were perhaps of wood, to become decayed. The Danish
march, as said, was probably so rapid that no time was left for fresh
preparations, and thus Oxford easily fell a prey to the invader. The
burning of the town was no doubt part of a consistent policy of the
Danes. They had treated Wallingford so, as has been seen, a few
years previously, and the action is described as ' is their wont.' And the
reason was this : — the principle of buying them off once established,
they raised their terms of course as high as they could, and it materially
helped the assessment of the terms to show, now and then, what
extensive damage they could inflict when not paid to keep away.
The following year the same work went on ; but in East Anglia
Ulfkytel was still ealdorman. The Danes evidently met with a firm and
well- sustained resistance there, instead of unprepared and hasty
sorties, or abject submission, or disgraceful bribes to go away. But
again Ulfkytel, as in 1004, was overpowered by numbers : had there
been but a few more such vigorous and determined men, England
would have been easily saved. The army again visited Oxfordshire ;
but as Oxford had been burnt and plundered the year previously, they
probably left it alone now, and passing out into Buckingham they
marched over fresh ground, ' down the Ouse to Bedford, and so
1 Amongst the good deeds of Leofstan, Abbot of St. Albans in Edward the Con-
fessor's time, was the making of a road through Chiltern, which, on account of so
much woodland, was infested by gangs of robbers who were a terror to the neigh-
bourhood, and rendered travelling, except in large armed companies, impossible.
{Gesta Abbatum S. Albani, Rolls Series, 1867, p. 39.)
152 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
onwards to Tempsford, ever burning as they went. Then went they
again to their ships with their booty.' The Chronicle proceeds
with a few words which bring vividly before us the indecision and
incompetency of Ethelred to rule a kingdom : —
' And when they had gone to their ships, then should the force have
again gone out to oppose them if they would land : then the force
went home ; and when they were east, then was the force held west ;
and when they were south, then was our force north. Then were
all the witan summoned to the king, and they should then advise how
this country could be defended. But though something was then
resolved, it stood not even for a month ; at last there was not a chief
man who would gather a force, but each fled as he best might ; nor
even at last would any shire assist another V
The heart-rending scenes which followed when tribute was not
paid, are here and there briefly described by the Chronicle. The
Archbishop of Canterbury, Elphege, whom we commemorate in our
Prayer Book calendar, was one who made a stand, and was given over
to the vengeance of the mob. We read the same year of the traitor
Eadric presiding over the chief Witan in London, while the Arch-
bishop was carried off ' and smitten with bones and horns of oxen till
one of them struck him with an iron axe on the head, so that with the
blow he was struck down.' Eadnoth, our Bishop of Dorchester, and
^Elfhun, Bishop of London, are recorded to have secured the body
and buried it in S. Paul's Minster. For each step backwards on the
part of the rulers of the kingdom, counselled by Eadric, the enemy
made a step forward, and in 1013 the climax came. Sweyn arrived,
and all the country seems to have submitted to him, one county after
the other. First all the towns in the old Danelaw on the east and
north of Waetling Street, and then the Northumbrians, then the people
of the five boroughs. The Chronicle continues : —
1 10 1 3. And after he came over Waetling Street, they wrought the
most evil that any army could do. He then went to Oxford, and the
townsmen immediately submitted and gave hostages ; and thence to
Winchester, and they did the same V
Florence of Worcester, followed almost verbatim by Roger of
Hoveden, substitutes the following: —
1 While his men were acting thus and raving like wild beasts, he
(Suanus) came to Oxford, and obtained that city sooner than he
thought, and having taken hostages, hastened to Winchester1.'
1 From Chronicles C, D, E. Appendix A, § 49.
2 From Chronicles C, D, E, and F. Appendix A, § 50.
3 Florence of Worcester, Chronicon, printed in A/on. Hist. Brit. p. 588. Ap-
pendix A, § 51.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 153
Henry of Huntingdon slightly varies the original also, but the sub-
stance is the same, and William of Malmesbury copies the event in this
abridged form : —
* Soon coming to the southern districts, Sweyn obliged the men of
Oxford and Winchester to obey his laws V
This shows, perhaps, to what an abject state the kingdom had been
brought. Before the victorious march of Sweyn the people seem to
have been cowed, and to submit rather than fight. Oxford could
hardly have been yet built up again ; for though erections of wood, or
of lath and plaster, which no doubt were the materials of most of the
buildings, did not take so long as stone, the people were probably poor,
and it would have taken them some three or four years to restore the
whole of the town. However this may be, it appears they did not wish
to risk any second burning of the town. They had suffered much from
Thurkill's army, and they did not see any better chance of being able
to resist Sweyn's ; besides, they had probably no men, or no defences
which could resist the incursions, and so they yielded ' sooner than
Sweyn expected.'
On Sweyn's death, in 1014, there seemed to be some chance for
retrieving England's disaster. The Witan sent after King Ethelred
saying, ' No lord was dearer to them than their natural lord, if he
would rule them better than he had before done.' In his reply he
promised to amend all those things which they all abhorred ; still he
seems in the last two years of his life to have shown no amendment
at all. The same year as his promise, Cnut is allowed to deceive the
people of Lincolnshire, and later on the army which lay at Greenwich —
the scene of Elphege's murder — was paid twenty-five thousand pounds.
The year following we read that the great council of the nation is
held at Oxford, possibly because London was not safe ; and an event
occurred there which is thus narrated.
'a. d. 1015. In this year was the great meeting at Oxford; and
there the ealdorman Eadric insnared Sigeferth and Morkere, the chief
thanes in the Seven Burghs. He enticed them into his chamber, and
therein they were foully slain. And the king then took all their pos-
sessions, and ordered Sigeferth's relict to be taken and brought to
Malmesbury. Then after a little space Eadmund, JEtheling, went
thither and took the woman against the King's will and had her for
his wife.
' Then before the nativity of S. Mary (Sept. 8) the iEtheling went
thence from the west, north to the Five Burghs, and immediately took
1 William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum AngL, lib. ii. § 177. Eng. Hist. Society's
ed. vol. i. p. 178. Appendix A, § 52.
154 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
possession of all Sigcferth's and Morkere's property, and all the folk
submitted to him V
Again Florence of Worcester follows closely in the wake of the
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and this in turn is copied almost verbatim by
Simeon of Durham and Roger of Hoveden : —
1 This year, when there was a great council (placitum) held at
Oxford, the perfidious ealdorman " Edric Streon" treacherously re-
ceived into his chamber the most powerful and honourable thanes
amongst the Seven-borough men, namely Sigeferth and Morcar, sons
of Earngrim, and ordered them to be secretly killed : and King
Ethelred took their possessions and ordered Aldgitha the widow of
Sigeferth to be taken to Malmesbury : and while she was kept there,
there came thither Eadmund JEtheling, and against the will of his father
he took her in marriage ; and between the feast of the Assumption
(Aug. 15) and the Nativity of S. Mary (Sept. 8) he went to the Five-
boroughs and invaded the land of Sigeferth and Morcar, and made
their people his subjects-.'
Henry of Huntingdon narrates the circumstance, but does not say
that it took place at Oxford. He writes : —
1 Anno XV. Ealdorman Eadric betrayed the eminent nobles Sige-
ferd and Morcher. For when they were called into his chamber he
had them killed. But Edmund the son of King Ethelred seized their
lands and married the wife of SigeferdV
The extract relating to this event from William of Malmesbury has
already been given 4, because he has confused two events, and erro-
neously connected the assassination of the two thanes with the burning
of S. Frideswide's on S. Brice's day in 1002.
It is not easy to gauge the importance of this event. Eadric seems
to have been one of those able yet selfish men who at all periods of
history have been the curse of humanity. By fluent language they
gain the popular ear, and by discovering some weakness in those in
high position and of high character, they pander to it and obtain their
confidence. To lookers-on it is astonishing how it is that they are
trusted. Ethelred probably was not altogether bad, but he was led by
the duplicity and cunning of Eadric, who cared nothing for the king-
dom, only for himself, and perhaps hoped out of the misery and
degradation of the kingdom to help on his own advancement and
obtain still greater power. It is only by considerations such as these,
that with the King and all the Witan at Oxford, such a crime could
1 From Chronicles, C, D, E, F. Appendix A, § 53.
2 Florence of Worcester, Ckronicon, printed in the Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 589.
Appendix A, § 54.
■ Henry of Huntingdon, Hisioria Anglorum, Rolls Series, 1879, p. 181. Ap-
pendix A, § 55. * See ante, p. 146.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 155
have been ventured on, or allowed to go unpunished. But from
what is gathered Eadric seems to have made the King and the Witan
party to his infamy. It is not improbable that he it was who coun-
selled the secret massacre of the Danes in 1002, and prompted his
brother in 1009 to advance the charge of treason against Wulfnoth
child (accused justly or unjustly we do not know), and obtained per-
mission to go and attack him, by which means the English ships were
fighting each other instead of joining to fight the Danes. Certain it
is that he, at this time, as Ealdorman of Mercia, allowed Thorkell's
army to ravage Oxford, and again in 10 10 to ravage all Oxford-
shire, Buckinghamshire, and Bedfordshire.
This foolish betrayal and murder of the Danish thanes is in keeping
with the rest of the deeds for which Eadric's name has been made
notorious. They were governors of the seven burhs (for York and
Chester had been added to the names of the five boroughs already
referred to more than once), and were probably therefore the two
ealdormen sent to represent the seven shires or districts belonging to
the said boroughs.
The plan was probably suggested on account of the blow which it
was thought would be struck at the Danish power ; or if done by Eadric,
without the knowledge of others, he would rely for pardon upon his
pretended zeal for the welfare of his country. He might even calculate
upon the approval of some, and thus hide his treachery and ingratiate
himself still further into the favour of his lord and king, and so
gain further scope for his own aggrandizement.
As to the facts, there is not much difference between the story as
told in the Chronicle, and that as told by the other chroniclers. That
William of Malmesbury should give the name of the widow is but
natural, as it would most likely have survived in his abbey, by tradition
if not in the registers.
It may be presumed that it was thought to be a matter of policy to
order all Sigeferth's possessions and his widow to be brought to
Malmesbury, well away from the Five burhs. Whether she had accom-
panied her husband to Oxford to the Gemot there is nothing to show,
but the probabilities are that if not there, she was at least away from
her own people and readily seized.
While then on the one hand we see that this year Oxford was
honoured by being the place chosen for the great Gemot of the king-
dom, it was also dishonoured by a dastardly crime.
The end of Ethelred's memorable reign was approaching, and the
end too of the independence of England, so far as it was to be ruled
156 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
by an English king ; and still again it is to be regretted that there is
every reason to suppose that Oxford was the scene of a tragedy, and
for the third time dishonoured by a crime.
King Ethelred at the close of 1015 seems to have been lying ill at
Corsham, in Wiltshire. The Danes, under Cnut, with 'their usual
wont,' landed at Sandwich and harried the neighbourhood, and then
going westward had landed at different seaports seizing whatever they
found to hand, till they came to the mouth of the Frome ; and going
up country over Dorsetshire and Wiltshire, they came dangerously
near where the king lay. Eadric, with his usual show of loyalty,
gathered forces together, though, as ealdorman of Mercia, his business
lay elsewhere, and then finding a favourable opportunity, enticed the
forty ships from the English and submitted to Cnut. As far as can be
seen he now openly played into the enemy's hands, and he could
not have done so had he not some considerable followers with him.
The battles fought were of no avail, and the energy and courage of
the men who fought were thrown away as long as a large portion of the
people had been cajoled into caring little for their country's honour,
and had found a man who either was trusted by the king or who from
his influence was feared by him, and could thus upset every counsel
that was rightly tendered, or destroy the effect of every blow which
was struck in the country's cause. The king himself had probably
escaped to London, for there can be no doubt he was, when in Wiltshire,
at Eadric's mercy. Early in the following year, 1016, Cnut, with his
army, and the ealdorman Eadric with him, marched from Wiltshire,
apparently side by side, over the Thames at Cricklade, into Eadric's
own territory, which he was bound to defend. The hopes of the
country then lay in the JEtheling Eadmund alone.
The events of this year, 1016, are many, and rapidly succeed one
another ; but it is necessary briefly to recapitulate them as they bear
upon the evidence that the climax took place at Oxford. Eadmund
did not go to Wessex, as Eadric had gained the ears of the people,
who seem to have blindly followed him. In the north he hoped for
better things from Uhtred, but it was not so. Uhtred had before
yielded to Sweyn, he now yielded to Cnut, but with a different
result ; for Eadric, finding perhaps a dangerous rival, prompted Cnut,
on Uhtred's yielding, at once to slay him. Meanwhile the army was
gathering in different parts in the east of England, and, it would
appear, dispersing again because of the vacillation of the king. Perhaps
there was reason now why he could not hope to go out and fight
Cnut and Eadric with any hope of success ; the twenty-seven years of
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 157
listless government had rendered energy almost useless at the last.
Still the ^Etheling Eadmund did not despair. Failing in the north to
raise a patriotic spirit, he seems to have reached his father in London
before his death, which took place on April 23rd. It is needless to
say, Eadmund was at once chosen king. The ships of King Cnut
were on their way to London, expecting no doubt, in the present state
of affairs, an easy victory. They reached Greenwich on May 7 th, and
as is described by the Chronicle, proceeding further up, came round
and behind the bridge by cutting a water-way through the marsh land
on the Southwark side.
Eadmund however was there, and a united people at his back, and
so they withstood the assaults. More than that, a series of campaigns
were inaugurated which must have taken up the next six or seven
months to accomplish. The first battle fought against Cnut and the
traitor was at Gillingham, in Somerset, the next at Sherston, in Wilts,
and we have a date for this, namely that it did not take place till after
Midsummer ; then a third campaign near Brentford, which included
a march into Wessex, to gather men and a defence of London; a
fourth took place in Kent, and here, strange as it may seem, ealdorman
Eadric meets the king at Aylesford; and if the words, ' never was
greater evil counsel counselled than this was,' are taken literally, it
would imply that Eadmund had actually listened to his father's enemy
and his country's traitor. The campaigns however went on. The
fifth at Assandun in Essex, where it would seem Eadric was again
pretending to fight on the English side, and again ' betraying
his royal lord and the English race/ Here was an ealdorman by
name JElfric l slain. Then Cnut lead his army into Gloucestershire,
where he learned that King Eadmund was. Unhappily again, Eadric
was there, and a treaty was agreed upon. This again seems strange after
all that had occurred. We read the Witan was there ; but then, no doubt,
Eadric had a strong political party behind him — a party whose cry must
have been peace at all hazards and at any cost. Eadmund, who had
shown the spirit of JElfred, must have heard the speeches which were
made there with disgust; and it is not too much to suppose that Eadric
laid stress on the precedent of JElfred's treaty with Guthrum in 878,
which was signed probably not many miles distant from the island
where they met; it is an island, which the dividing stream of the
1 It could scarcely have been the Mercian ealdorman of that name who treacher-
ously deserted in 992 and in 1003 shammed sickness before the battle. See ante,
p. 148. Possibly, however, it may be the one who signed vEthelred's charter to
S. Frideswide, see p. 145.
i;,S Till-: EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Severn makes opposite Gloucester, and which the chronicler nanii
'Olaney near Deorhyrste V The Chronicle then proceeds: —
1 And then they separated with this agreement, and Eadmund took
to Wessez and Cnut to Mercia. And the army then went to their
ships, with the things that they had taken, and the Londoners made a
truce with the army, and bought themselves peace ; and the army
brought their ships to London and took them winter quarters therein.
Then on S. Andrew's Mass-day (Nov. 30) King Eadmund died, and his
body lies at Glastonbury with his grandfather Eadgar.
' 1017. In this year King Cnut succeeded to all the kingdom of the
Angle-race and divided it into four : to himself Wessex, and to Thor-
kell East-Angli , and to Eadric Mercia and to Eric Northumbria V
It must have been with a very heavy heart that Eadmund, after the
signing of the treaty, set out on his journey home : that home was
probably London. There he had been proclaimed king; there his
friends were gathered ; there he was more wanted than anywhere else ;
but it is clear he never reached that city.
Florence of Worcester, it is true, adds that he died at ' London,'
but as he uses no other sources than the Chronicle itself at this time,
it is clearly an interpolation — either a guess, or an error, from London
appearing in the previous line3; but he is copied by Simeon of
Durham, and Roger of Hoveden4.
But Henry of Huntingdon gives the circumstances of Eadmund's
death in detail, and he says it occurred in Oxford. His account runs
in substance thus : —
* Edmund the King was a few days afterwards killed at Oxford by
treachery. And thus he was murdered. When the King, so terrible
to his enemies, and so much feared in his kingdom, went one night into
his private chamber, the son of ealdorman Edric, who had by the counsel
of his father, concealed himself there ... he stabbed the King twice
with a sharp knife, leaving the instrument in the wound, and then left
him and fled. Edric then coming to King Cnut saluted him saying,
" Hail, thou art sole king ! " When he had made manifest what he had
done, the King replied, " I will make thee on account of thy most high
deserts, higher than all the tall men of the English." And so he
ordered him to be beheaded, and his head to be fixed on the top of a
1 The island is marked on the Ordnance map as Alney, and is of considerable
extent.
2 From Chronicles, C. D, E, F. Appendix A, § 56.
3 Just in the same way Florence of Worcester stands alone amongst the
chroniclers (excepting of course those who have copied from him) in making
King Harold die at London, instead of Oxford, in 1040.
4 Other later writers, e. g. Brompton, Knighton, etc., sometimes follow Florence
of Worcester, sometimes Henry of Huntingdon. For a summary of the variations
see Freeman's Norman Conquest; Appendix XX, third ed. 1877, vol. i. p. 711.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 159
pole, on the highest tower of London. Thus died Edmund, a brave
king, after he had reigned but one year, and he was buried next to
Edgar his grandfather at Glastonbury V
William of Malmesbury tells the story of the violent death of
Eadmund, which he speaks of as being a matter of general rumour.
It is somewhat the same story as that told by Henry of Huntingdon,
as a matter of actual fact. The former however does not name any
place as the scene of his death. He writes : —
* And soon afterwards on the feast of S. Andrew [Nov. 30] Edmund
died — it is doubtful by what accident — and was buried at Glastonbury
near to his grandfather Edgar. Rumour asperses Edric that to obtain
the favour of Cnut, he compassed his death by means of his own ser-
vants. It is said that there were two kings chamberlains to whom the
King entrusted wholly his life ; these he won over by promises, and
though they were at first much horrified at the enormity of the crime,
in a short time he managed to make them his accomplices V
It will be observed that William of Malmesbury speaks of the story
as an aspersion on Eadric, and perhaps, if he had no better authority
than general rumour, this might well suggest itself to him. But it
ought not to be allowed to weigh too much against the definite narra-
tive of Henry of Huntingdon's statement, that he met with a violent
death in Oxford.
And a general survey of the surrounding circumstances points in this
direction. Allowing for the time necessary for the events of the year,
the treaty of Olney must have been in November ; there it is that we
last hear of Eadmund, and in this month he died. As already said, he
never appears to have reached London at all, whither there is little doubt
he would be bound. The negative evidence of his name not appear-
ing in the narrative of the events which took place at London, when
the Londoners made a truce with the army and bought themselves
peace, is very strong. The positive statement that he was buried at
Glastonbury is stronger. For had he reached London before he died,
he would undoubtedly have been buried in S. Paul's, where his father
JEthelred had been buried in April of the same year.
Oxford lay in the direct line from Gloucester to London by almost
any route likely to be taken, and, more than that, there is a special
reason why Oxford may well have been chosen as a place for the
crime, if crime it was. By the terms of the treaty, Wessex was to be
1 Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, Rolls Series, 1879, P- I^5. Ap-
pendix A, § 57.
2 William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum AngL Engl. Hist. Society's ed., London
1840, lib. ii. § 180, p. 303. Appendix A, § 58.
160 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
in the future the kingdom of the English king. Once there, the loyalty
of his people would protect him, for his misfortunes would win for him
their sympathy. Once past the borders — once out of the kingdom of
Mercia — nay more, once outside the south gate of the border town of
Oxford, he would be safe, and after all Eadric's strategy and villany his
chosen lord, King Cnut, might fail to gain and hold the whole king-
dom, and he himself enjoy the personal honours for which he had so
basely striven. This was the last chance when a successful blow
could be struck ; Eadric too was well acquainted with this last halting-
place within his dominion, and as ealdorman of Mercia he was all-
powerful there, and no one could question his acts. Moreover the
man who employed assassins to strike down the thanes Sigeferth and
Morcar at his bidding there, only the year before, might well know
what hands could be relied upon for a similar purpose now.
While accepting the outline of the story, there is no necessity of
accepting the details ; they are simply such as would occur to the his-
torian to add in order to accentuate the enormity of the crime — and
his story of Cnut's sentence of punishment, that his head should be
cut off and raised on a pole on the highest tower of London, must be
attributed to poetic licence. While we learn, however, that Cnut did
reward him for his general treachery by confirming him in his old
command over Mercia as ealdorman, we also learn that in the fol-
lowing year he was slain in London ; and as the Chronicle adds, ' very
rightly/ it is not unreasonable to suppose that, presuming too much
on his power and popularity, he entered London, and that the loyal
subjects of the murdered Eadmund avenged themselves on the mur-
derer. Florence of Worcester hints that it was by Cnut's orders that
Eadric was assassinated as being a dangerous man, and in this
respect he would, so far as this point is concerned, be in agreement
with Henry of Huntingdon. Still, on the whole, Cnut's tenure of the
kingdom was of too uncertain a character to risk such a step, if, as
seems to have been the case, Eadric had a large following : it was
different in the case of his ordering the ^Etheling Eadwy to be slain
the following year, as few perhaps would be found to avenge it.
It may perhaps be asked, ' How is it that Henry of Huntingdon
should learn that such a circumstance had taken place in Oxford,
unknown to all the other chroniclers ? ' In answer to this the following
considerations may be worth a moment's attention. The position and
influence of the instigators of the assassination may well have prevented
a record being made in the Chronicles, and hence the handing down
of the story would have to depend wholly upon tradition ; and further,
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION. 161
in no place would that tradition be likely to be better preserved than
where the event took place. Now there is reason to suppose that
Henry of Huntingdon had an intimate friend in Oxford, an historian
like himself, who probably assisted him with material in compiling his
history. His name was Walter ; and Henry addresses to him an epistle
upon the ' contempt of this world's honours.' This was no doubt Walter
the Archdeacon of Oxford, a name which we frequently meet with at
this time *. It may fairly be advanced, then, that Henry of Hunting-
don had in Oxford a friend who, from his fondness for history, was
likely to be well acquainted with the traditions of the place and who
would have told him of such though not to be found in writing. The
Archdeacon died about the year 1140, and just before Henry's epistle
reached him, for it ends with his epitaph. If the Archdeacon was
seventy years of age at his death he might in his youth have conversed
with people who were actually living when the murder took place 2.
Passing on we come to the year 10 18, and we find that Oxford
again plays a part in the chapter of English history. Already a
Gemot had been called and held by Cnut in London, in which the
general settlement of the kingdom was arranged. At Oxford there
seems to have been a special Gemot for deciding upon the laws which
should be accepted as the common laws of the land. The words of
the Chronicle are, as usual, very concise : —
'a. d. 1018. And the Danes and the Angles were unanimous at
Oxford for Eadgar's law3.'
Florence of Worcester, followed by Roger of Hoveden, simply
translates the exact words, and that very closely. Neither Henry
of Huntingdon nor William of Malmesbury refer to this assembly at
Oxford.
England was now entirely under the Danish King Cnut, and his
holding a council at Oxford shows to what importance the place had
now risen. No doubt its central position had something to do with
1 His name appears as a signature as early as n 15. He appears amongst
others at the foundation of Godestow Nunnery in 11 39 and signs the charter
officially. Geoffrey of Monmouth {Hist. Brit. lib. i. § 1) refers to Walter
the Archdeacon of Oxford, a man skilled in oratory and learned in foreign his-
tories. Geoffrey Gaimar also mentions ' Le bon livere de Oxenford, ki fust Walter
l'Arcediacn' (L'Estorie line 69 from end). The Epistle to him is printed as the
last tract in Wharton's Anglia Sacra, vol. ii. p. 694. Also as an Appendix in Henry
of Huntingdon. Rolls Series, 1879, P- 297-
2 Henry of Huntingdon in recounting the burning at the massacre of S. Brice,
says 'of this, I in my youth heard some very old people speak.' See ante, p. 147.
3 This is from Chron. C. It is followed almost literatim in Chrons. D, E, F,
Appendix A, § 59.
162 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the choice, as well as the fact that it was situated on the chief river
of the country when rivers afforded the chief means of communica-
tion. The Thames had ceased to be the boundary between two great
divisions of the kingdom, but the old traditional boundaries of Mercia
and Wessez had, nevertheless, a considerable influence in the selection of
the place l. The result of the meeting seems to have been a complete
reconciliation between the new subjects and their new king. It is the
first event that we have yet come to of this class. In 912 Oxford is
being prepared to resist the attack of the Danes ; in 1002 it is the
scene of the burning of unsuspecting Danes who had fled to a church
for safety. In 1009 the city is sacked and burned by the Danes; and
in 1013 it ignominiously surrenders to a Danish king; in 1 01 5 it saw
the treacherous murder of two of the chiefs of an important district in
the power of the Danes ; in 10 16, it is the scene of the assassination
of the English king through indirect Danish influences.
It is a relief therefore now to find at the end of the story in which
Oxford seems to have played so important a part, that something was
done here to promote the welfare of the country. It is satisfactory too
to find that though a Danish king presided over the Gemot, the old
laws of the country were to be retained and to be in force for English-
man and Dane alike, and so in a measure the subjection to a foreign
ruler would be the less felt.
It is probable that in these troublous times the Gemots were all
held within what are called the Castle precincts. Occupied now by the
county courts and prison, the area is a large one, and was larger still
before the New Road was carried across the inner bailey at the foot of
the Castle mound, a mound so familiar to all who go from Carfax to
the Railway Station, but perhaps looked upon by few as so fraught
with historical associations. As already said, it was constructed there
at the beginning of the history of Oxford, namely in 912, to prevent
the inroads of the Danes, and now, in 1018, beneath its shadow a
Gemot was held presided over by a Danish king. Within the precincts
were houses set apart for the royal residence. In one of the apart-
1 The Chronicles under the year 1017 refer to the fourfold division of the country
under Cnut, viz. Northumberland, East Anglia, Mercia and Wessex. See ante,
p. 158, while the old divisions appear to survive in fact, though described differently,
to the Conqueror's time, if the laws which bear his name can be accepted as genuine.
In those ' De Pace Regici* the difference of the ' bot' is thus expressed: 'Secundum
Merchena-lahe c, solidos pene ; secundum Dene-lahe pena CXLini librorum, et
forisfactum regis, quod ad vicecomitem pertinet, scilicet XL solidos in Merchene-
lahe et L solidos in Westsaxene-lahe.' (Thorpe's Ancient Laws and Institutes,
vol. i. p. 467). Whatever was the influence, certain it is that Oxford was also
chosen as the place of the Gemot, as will be seen, in 1036 and again in 1065.
OXFORD DURING THE DANISH INVASION, 163
merits ^Ethelweard the king's son breathed his last. In another, pro-
bably, the Northern thanes, Sigeferth and Morkar, led from the great
banqueting hall, were betrayed and slain. In another, perhaps, King
Eadmund was foully murdered. Over all these events that lofty mound
has cast its shadow ; it is all that we possess to connect the present
with those times. The deep ditches have been filled up1, and a portion
only of their line is marked by the current of water which supplies the
Castle mill. Above the mill rises the great tower ; that tower saw the
results of the Norman Conquest, and indeed may itself be said to be
one of them. But the mound alone of all that remains has looked
down upon the Danish Conquest and all its attendant humiliations
and horrors, which have been described in this and the preceding
chapter.
1 The best view of the Castle mound is obtained by mounting a few steps leading
from Bulwarks-Lane on to the piece of high ground in front of Elm Cottages, at
the back of the new High School for boys in George Street, and looking over the
site of Jews' Mount (i.e. Mont de juis). The view over the Castle mound is
undisturbed and, as few houses are visible, one is able somewhat to conjure up the
scene as it really presented itself in the days to which these historical notes refer.
M 2
CHAPTER IX.
Oxford during the Fifty Years before the
Norman Conquest.
The destruction which had been wrought by the burning and plunder-
ing of the Danes in 1009 must have left Oxford in a very desolate
state, and the constant drain of money and men during the costly but
futile attempts to repel the Danes, must have left little opportunity for
the town to retrieve the losses it had sustained. Although Cnut was
a foreign king, it was agreed by the Gemot held here in 1 01 8 that the
English laws should be obeyed; and we may therefore presume
that with peace there was some chance of prosperity returning to the
town, and this view is borne out by an incidental reference to Oxford
relating to this time. It is not found in the Chronicle, or, indeed, in
any of the chroniclers, but amongst the charters of the great abbey in
the neighbouring town of Abingdon, and in connection with a little
village in Berkshire, about four miles north of Wantage, and ten miles
south-west of Oxford, now known as Lyford, but in the charters and
in the Domesday Survey spelt Linford. The date of the charter is
1034, and it runs as follows: —
< . . . . Wherefore I Cnut, by God's free mercy and especial
goodness King of all Albion, have granted for ever the small plot of
ground which is called by the inhabitants of these parts Linford,
that is to say sufficient quantity for two tenants, and a certain
minster {monasteriolum) dedicated in honour of Saint Martin, Bishop,
together with its adjacent messuage {praediolo) 1 in the city which is
called by the celebrated name of Oxford, to our Lord Jesus Christ
and to his ever-virgin Mother Mary, for the use of the monks in
Abingdon . . . .2 '
1 The exact force of the words monasteriolum and praediolum cannot perhaps
be determined definitely. They are probably translations of the words used in the
Saxon charters. The former means quite as frequently a church as a monastery;
the pratdiolum was probably equivalent to the glebe land attached, or, in a town,
certain messuages, the rental of which would help to sustain a priest.
* Abingdon Abbey Chronicle, Rolls Series, London, 1858, vol. 1 p. 439- »
should perhaps be added that Mr. Stevenson, the editor, who has had great
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 165
The boundaries of the land at Lyford are then given, and at the end
is added, in one of the two manuscripts of the Chronicle, and in the
language of the time, the following : —
1 This land-plot bequeathed Ethelwine unto Abbendune and the
hagae at Oxnaford, in which he himself " onsaet " [i. e. dwelt], before
many witnesses1.'
The witnesses included Cnut, Elgyfu {praedidi Regis conlaterand)
JEthelnoth, Archbishop of the church of Canterbury, JElfric, Arch-
bishop of the city of York, six other bishops, whose names are
given, four abbots, two priests, two ealdormen (that is, Godwine and
Leofric), fifteen thanes, and one praefectus (i. e. reeve)2.
Later on in the same chronicle there is still a further reference to
the gift of S. Martin's Church.
' And when Abbot Athelwin, a man very vigorous in the conduct of
secular as well as ecclesiastical matters, came to the end of his days,
Siward, a monk from the Abbey of Glastonbury, succeeded him. It
was due to the kindness which King Cnut knew rightly to prevail
with him that the said King gave out of charity the Church of
S. Martin in Oxford, together with a messuage (praediolum) V
Although the grant is of a certain 'minster' of S. Martin, and there-
fore, taken literally, might be said to imply that there was a church
already in existence, still practically there is no reason to doubt that
this charter of King Cnut represents, with the transference of the
land to Abingdon Abbey, the foundation of the church.
As already pointed out4, the grant of a site for a church in the centre
of the town points very strongly to there being no parish church here
before, and therefore it is a distinct step in advance : as other churches
were built and parishes came to be established, they were distributed
round the central parish which formed the nucleus, so to speak, of
the whole.
But with prosperity to the town generally it seems strange that we
hear no more of S. Frideswide's. The three hydes round Oxford,
and the two hydes at Cutslow, and the hyde at Whithull, with the ten
hydes at Winchendon in Buckinghamshire, seemingly constituted all
their possessions from Ethelred's time (1004) onwards, as is shown by
experience, pronounces it in his opinion ' a genuine document.' Vol. ii. p. 523. It
is printed in the Codex Diplomaticus, No. 746, vol. iv. p. 38. Appendix A, § 60.
1 Abingdon Abbey Chronicle, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 440. In the other MS. the
same passage is given in Latin.
2 The charter is not dated. The signatures seem to give the date as 1032-1034,
though the identification of all the bishops is not certain.
Abingdon Abbey Chronicle, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 443.
4 See ante, p. 1 2 1 .
166 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the survey of 1087 \ The monastery seems from some cause or
another not to have displayed any energy whatever. To have allowed
a neighbouring monastery some six miles off, and in another county,
to build and hold a church (and this is what the charter practically
amounts to) in the very centre of the town, and within two hundred
and fifty yards of their very gates, betokens either great apathy, or
else they were in so poor a condition that they could not build any
churches themselves, or in such poor estimation that they excited no
generosity on the part of their friends. Although in the reign of King
Henry I. they seem to have made up for lost time, there does not
appear, so far as can be gathered by the Domesday Survey, that they
had now, nor for the next fifty years, any church in Oxford whatever
served from their monastery, except the single church within their own
precincts. Were it not for the absence of such errors as usually dis-
figure forged charters, and the corroboration in Domesday, there
would be reason on account of such absolute silence to suspect
Ethelred's charter to be a fabrication of the twelfth century2.
And here perhaps a word should be said respecting a somewhat
unsatisfactory paragraph, which in the Cartulary follows on after the
charter relating to Ethelred's restoration of S. Frideswide's in 1004 ;
and, as will be observed, it professes to relate to events which happened
after that date 3. It runs as follows : —
1 Now the aforesaid King Ethelred increased the said church as he
had before promised as [is read] in the chronicles.
' And afterwards before God subjected England to the people of
Normandy, this church with its possessions was given by a certain king
to a certain abbot of Abingdon : the secular canons are related to have
therefore been despoiled of their possessions, and driven from their
abode ; and the property being transferred to the monks, was at their
disposal for some years.
1 Afterwards, as it is the case with the affairs of mortals, by the
beneficence of a certain king, their property was, after deliberate
counsel, restored to the aforesaid canons. And up to the year of our
Lord's incarnation 1122, they ruled over the same church V
It may however be possible that, though the compiler of the
Cartulary has placed the above memorandum (for it is not in any
1 Against the addition of an hyde 'juxta Oxon ' is to be set the omission in the
Domesday Survey of the one hyde of Whithill.
'z Kemble, in the Codex Diplomaticus, No. 709, vol. iii. p. 327, puts for
some reason an asterisk to it, implying that, in his opinion, it was not genuine.
3 The charter is printed ante. p. 142, but see also ante, p. 159.
4 From the larger cartulary of S. Frideswide in the possession of the Dean and
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. i6j
sense a deed) after the charter of King Ethelred, and implied that
what is recorded took place between the restoration by that king and
the Norman Conquest, he has done so in error ; and that the source
of his statement, whether tradition or document, has been misunder-
stood. It has already been pointed out1, when discussing a similar state-
ment relating to the introduction of secular canons, that the granting
of the abbey to a certain abbot of Abingdon was most likely when
Abbot ^Ethelwold was made Bishop of Winchester, and in 964, as
is recorded, besought King Eadgar to give him certain monasteries
to restore 2: as the energetic disciple of S. Dunstan, his first care was to
turn out secular canons and put regulars in their place ; in some cases
perhaps there was some injustice, in others perhaps, where reform was
absolutely needed, the change was attended with beneficial results.
The reference to the king restoring the seculars seems also to point
to this view of the origin of the passage, for on the accession of
Eadward (the second king of that name, and called the Martyr) in
975, the monks in their turn, as already shown when discussing the
question, were driven out and the seculars restored.
There is, however, a singular record, which points to the replacing
of monks by canons at a date after iEthelred's charter of 1004, viz.
a passage, which Leland in his Collectanea 3 gives as Ex veteri codice
Rofensis Monasterii, and belonging to the year 1049, an<^ which runs
as follows4 : —
Canons of Christchurch, folio 8. Printed very imperfectly in Dugdale, vol. ii. p. 144.
Appendix A, § 61.
1 See ante, p. 1 39.
2 The entry there adduced in support of this explanation, it should be observed,
is from the Bodleian copy of the Chronicle, i. e. Chronicle E, which is supposed
to have been compiled at Peterborough, and takes especial notice of events in
Mercia. The full wording of the passage is as follows : ' In the year after he was
hallowed [i. e. Athelwold, Abbot of Abingdon, who had been hallowed Bishop of
Winchester, Nov. 29, 963] he made monasteries, and drove the clerks out of the
bishopric because that they would not hold any rule, and set monks there ....
Then afterwards he came to King Eadgar and besought him that he would give him
all the monasteries which heathens before had ruined, because that he would restore
them ; and the king blithely granted it.'
3 Leland, Collectanea, vol. hi. p. 73. Printed in Hearne's ed.,1774, vol. iv. p. 72.
4 After some trouble a MS. containing the passage has been found. Possibly it
was only an abstract of this which Leland saw. It is a chronicle evidently com-
piled at Rochester, consisting of 200 large folio leaves with double columns written
in one hand down to 1275, with illustrations (some of which are copied apparently
from a much earlier MS.), and continued by later hands to 1307. It is preserved
in the Cottonian Library (Nero, D. 2) and the passage occurs on folio 98 a. Eodem
etiam anno institutio Canonicorum Sancte Frideswide de Oxonia. The incidental
reference to a neighbouring monastery is not one likely to have been interpolated
without some authority.
i68 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
1 1049. King Edward the third, who is called Saint Edward, restored
the Monastery ot'S. Peter at Westminster and extended it, by granting
abundant possessions and liberties. The same year was the institution
of the canons of S. Frideswide at Oxford.'
Here, since a definite date is given for the change, there is more
reason to accept the passage, but still the possibility remains that the
chronicler has made a mistake between Eadward the Martyr and
Eadward the Confessor, and has transposed a passage belonging to
the one to a date which belongs to the other : while another writer
has referred to the regulars taking the place of the seculars later still,
giving the rather improbable date of 1060 l.
The statement that the monastery was given to ' a certain abbot of
Abingdon ' has led some to suppose that at one time the indepen-
dence of S. Frideswide was at an end, and that it became simply a
cell to the larger abbey. Although this would account for the circum-
stance of the central church of the town being in the hands of the
neighbouring monastery, on the whole it is not at all probable. The
Abingdon Chronicle is so full in recording the events of the period,
and the charters so numerous, that it is impossible to conceive any
great accession to the power and influence of Abingdon, as this would
amount to, without some record showing itself directly or indirectly.
As a matter of fact, throughout the seven hundred and forty printed
pages which the Chronicle occupies, S. Frideswide is only mentioned
twice; once in connection with some exchange of land in Henry Ts
reign circa 1 1 20, and once in connection with S. Aldate's church during
the rule of abbot Ingulph, which commenced 11 30.
Abingdon undoubtedly was very wealthy at this time. This is
apparent, not from the fact only that we possess so fine a cartulary
preserved amidst the pages of a Chronicle, but from the fact that the
Domesday Survey testifies materially to the truth of the acquisition
which most of the charters purport to represent. Their property by de-
grees had come up close to Oxford during the previous century, forming
as it were a belt round Oxford on the southern and western side.
Charters granted by King Edwy2 in 955-6 had practically subjected
1 What could be the origin of this statement given in Sir John Peshall's edition
of Antony a Wood's notes on the city of Oxford (London, 1773, p. 121) has not
been discovered. It runs as follows: ' 1060, The secular canons of S. Frid. being
expelled from the monastery on account of their having wives, King Edward ordered
a set of regulars to succeed them in their office at the instance of Pope Nicholas II.'
a Chron. A/on. Ab„ Rolls Series, p. 180. While Seacourt only just exists in name
on the way to Wytham, the local names of the fields and meadows given in the
course of the boundaries have been lost, so that the demarcation cannot be made
out ; but it is clear a considerable portion of the river Thames — namely from the
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 169
twenty hydes, including Hincksey {Hengestes-ige\ Seacourt (Seofecan-
wyrthe), and, just beyond it to the north, Wytham (Wihthai?i). Also
twenty-five hydes at Bay worth (BcFgenweorthe)1 , and certain land at
Kennington(Cem'g/uney. Some few years later, i.e. in 985, Ethelred
had completed the circuit by a grant of ten hydes at Wootton 3. That
their property came up to the very Thames on the eastern side, even
close to Oxford, is illustrated by the dispute, in 945 or thereabouts,
concerning Beri meadow, the large piece of meadow land lying in the
Thames, over against Iffley, and about which there was some doubt
whether it belonged to Oxfordshire or Berkshire. It appears —
if we accept the story which the monk tells us — that the abbey gained
the victory ; but the means were perhaps not those which would be
successful in these days 4.
S. Frideswide's monastery, then, if not subjected to Abingdon, was
at least thrown into the shade by its wealthier and more energetic
neighbour — and yet as Oxford, now under the Danish rule, was seem-
ingly in a prosperous condition, retrieving the devastations of past
years, S. Frideswide ought to have exhibited some prosperity also.
That we have no charter or reference to any before the time of
Ethelred in 1004 is accounted for by the loss by fire. That we have
no account of grants of land to the monastery between that date and
the time of Henry I, cannot be explained in the same manner.
Great Ford up to c Eanflgeds-gelade ' — formed the northern boundary. There is
reason to suppose that this was a restoration of property after the Danish incur-
sions, as they seem to have obtained a confirmation charter of all their property
on the south side of the Thames in this neighbourhood (including Hincksey,
Cumnor, Kennington, &c.) in 825 from Coenulf, King of Mercia, so as to be safe
when the land was shifting backwards and forwards from one kingdom to another
{ante, p. 1 1 1). Further {Chron, Ab., p. 1 26) the chronicler contends that it was all
granted originally by King Ceadwalla, as if it had been the original property of Hean.
1 Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series, p. 219. The name by which the manor of the
25 hydes was known, is only represented now by the farm on the west of Bagley
Wood. Very few of the local names of the fields and boundary lines have survived.
2 Chron. Mon. Ab., p. 216. It evidently lay between the river on the east side
and ' Baggan-worth ' of the previous charter on the west side, and occupied what
is now Bagley Wood. Elsewhere in the general charter relating to the Cumnor
district (see ibid. pp. 126 and 176), reference is made to the Bacgan-leah, which
name we retain in the well-known Bag-ley Wood.
3 Chron. Mon. Ab., p. 401. In the boundaries attached to the vill, and practi-
cally forming the parish of Wootton, between three and four miles south-west of
Oxford, are several names which occur in the other charters, thus uniting the series.
There are also one or two survivals in the names, e. g. fox hola cumbe, in Fox-
combe hill ; cealdan-wylle, probably in Chil'swell farm ; blacan grave in Biackgrove
farm. In one of the general boundaries (p. 126) we get brom-cumbe, which
possibly survives in Browncomb Wood close to Bayworth.
4 Chron. Mon. Ab., p. 88. See a summary of the case given in Proceedings
of the O. A. & H. S., vol. ii. p. 169.
170 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Besides Abingdon, which lay six miles to the south and on the
Berkshire side of the river, there was another formidable rival to
S. Frideswide's springing up some six miles to the west on the Oxford-
shire side, namely at Ensham. At the very beginning of the eleventh
century ^Ethelmar, ealdorman of Devonshire, the same who was one
of those to submit to Sweyn, in 10131 — had exchanged with his son-
in-law ^Ethelweard certain lands, giving him thirty-six mansiones, in
different districts, against thirty tnansiunculi, and had established at
Ensham a monastery. The charter of King Eihelred2, which is dated
1005, must from the signatures have been completed not later than that
date, and the greater number are the same as those who sign Ethelred's
charter, restoring S. Frideswide's. It must be observed however that
these lands, so far as may be judged from the boundaries of the grants
made to them at this date, appear to lie for the most part some dis-
tance from the abbey; and thirty manses of land which were close to
it are on the north-west, and so not calculated to encroach upon the
immediate neighbourhood of Oxford. It must also be observed that
as regards accession of lands, so far as can be judged from the absence
of charters, and the presence of a single entry only in the Domesday
Survey, they were not more prosperous than the Oxford house.
Although, as has been pointed out, there is not sufficient ground to
suppose that S. Frideswide put itself under the protection of Abingdon,
there is the clear evidence of a valuable charter, a copy of which is
preserved in the Ensham chartulary, that this monastery became
practically an adjunct to the minster of S. Mary at Stowe in Lincoln-
shire, which, in 1040, was founded mainly by the bounty of Leofric
and the Lady Godiva. This accounts, partly, for the meagre ap-
pearance which the abbey shows in Domesday. On the other hand,
by the chance of fortune, at a later period, the Eynsham house be-
came celebrated, and the house of Stowe declined, so that the reverse
of what had originally happened took place, and the house at Stowe
was merged into that at Ensham. Still it must not be overlooked
that in the eleventh century the union of the two monasteries of Stowe
and Eynsham created a rival influence which might well have inter-
fered with S. Frideswide's prosperity : and in the Domesday Survey it
is found that Ensham had a church in Oxford, namely, S. Ebbe's.
1 A.-S. Chron. sub anno 1013 : ' After the Danes had come over Weeding Street,
and when Oxford submitted, they went afterwards to Bath. And thither came the
ealdorman ^Ethelmar and the western thanes with him, and they all submitted to
Svein, and gave hostages.'
" Kemble, Codex Diplomatic™, No. DCCXIV, vol. Hi. p. 339-
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 171
At the same time that the Monastery of S. Frideswide seemingly
was shedding no lustre over the city of Oxford, as others were over
the cities in which they were situated, the place of the Bishop's seat,
namely Dorchester, so far as can be ascertained, was not in any way
bringing the diocese into prominence on account of the energy or
ability of its successive Bishops. Something perhaps may be put
down to the account of the diocesan registers having been lost in all
probability when the see was removed by Remigius to Lincoln, in 1092 ;
for he may well have been too intent upon his new foundation, to think
about taking the proper precautions to preserve the story of the old
one. That there had been registers kept here seems certain from
such entries as the baptism of the kings Cynegils, Cwichelm, and
Cuthred, having found their way into the Chronicles1. Yet it would
appear that William of Malmesbury, when he wrote his History of
the Bishops in 1 125 — that is, some thirty-five years only after the trans-
lation of the bishopric — was unable to obtain any information about the
diocese, and apparently had difficulty in making out even a complete
list of the bishops. It is quite possible that he made it from the
signatures to the few charters to which he had access.
Whether or not in the course of his researches, which distinctly in-
cluded visits to Glastonbury and Oxford, he went to Dorchester to
discover what archives might exist, cannot be determined. He seems
however to write as if from his own experience when he commences
his account of the diocese with the words Dorcestra est villa in paga
Oxnefordensi exilis et infrequens. He however goes on to say that
the old church with its chapels (of which we have at most but the
lower part of one wall remaining, if even that) 2 was remaining in his
time in good condition and repair, as he writes, Majestas tamen ecclesi-
arum magna, seu veteri opera, seu seduliiate nova.
As regards the bishops, they seem during this century rather to have
had their chief seat here than at Leicester, which was the case in the
last century, but what the extent of their diocese was it is impossible
to determine. After Eadnoth and Escwi, which brought the list of the
1 See ante, p. 86.
2 The lower portion of the north wall of the nave shows rather early character
outside, against which the cloister of the monastery was erected. When the
monastery was founded in Stephen's reign, i.e. 11 40, and when, in the following
reign, they began building a new and larger church, they may well have made use
of some of the walling ; but as they would want to keep the old building for the
service till the new one was erected, they would most likely build on one side of it,
and might therefore have utilised this one piece of wall only. As one cannot point
to any masonry in the neighbourhood of Oxford existing, which was standing at this
period, it is thought well to note this, though only a possible case.
172 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
bishops down to 10021, the next four given by William of Malmes-
bury are, Elfhelm, a second Eadnoth, Etheric, and then a third Eadnoth.
The signatures of these range between 1002 and 1046. Of the second
of them we read in the Chronicle, under 1012, that Eadnoth of Dor-
chester was one of the two bishops (Elfhun of London being the other)
to receive the body of the murdered ^Elfhege when brought into
London from Greenwich, and who buried it in ' S. Paul's Church.'
Later on, under the year 1016, we find that this Eadnoth was fighting
at the battle of Assandun, and was amongst those who were slain,
owing mainly, if we can trust the chronicler, to the treachery of
Eadric. Of Bishop Etheric we read nothing; but of the third Eadnoth
and of his successor we obtain some glimpse in a notice of him, told
somewhat differently in different copies of the Chronicle. In Chronicle
C, under the year 1049, we find: —
• And in this year died Eadnoth, the good Bishop of Oxfordshire;
and Oswig, Abbot of Tborney ; and Wulfnoth, Abbot of Westminster;
and King Eadward gave the bishoprick to Ulf, his priest, and ill
bestowed it.'
In Chronicle D the writer places the death of Eadnoth under the year
1 050, and varies the latter part.
1 In this year died [ ] of Oxfordshire, Oswig, Abbot of Thorney,
and Wulfnoth, Abbot of Westminster; and Ulf, the priest, was placed as
pastor to the Bishoprick that Eadnoth had held ; but he was afterwards
driven away because he performed nothing bishoplike therein, so that
it shames us now to tell more2.'
In Chronicle E the death is placed under 1046 and in F under 1048.
It was Eadnoth, as we learn from the Ensham story, who built the
church of S. Mary at Stowe in Lincolnshire, to which was affiliated
the newly founded abbey of Ensham, but in contrast to this there
seems to be no good word for Ulf. This arises from his being one of
the foreign chaplains brought over to England, and therefore looked
upon as an intruder. But it would appear that elsewhere than in
England he was found unfit, for two of the Chronicles describe his
visit to Rome.
< And afterwards the pope had a synod at Vercelli, and Bishop Ulf
came thereto ; and they were very near breaking his staff, if he had
not given the more money, because he could not do his Rites so well
as he should3.'
It will be observed that in the first extract about Eadnoth it is said
1 See ante, p. 138 2 A.-S. Chron E, sub anno 1046. Appendix A, § 63.
3 A.-S. Chron. E, sub anno 1047, and F, sub anno 1049. Appendix A, § 64.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 173
that the good bishop of Oxfordshire died. It might almost seem that
Oxfordshire was the recognized name for the diocese, and not
Dorchester, though no signature of a bishop of Oxfordshire has been
observed.
Curiously enough, William of Malmesbury omits all reference to Ulf,
continuing the list with Wluui and then Remigius. He could scarcely
have considered Ulf and Wulfwi to be the same, since the entry in
one of the Chronicles is so exceedingly distinct as to the two Bishops.
'1053. . . . And Leofwine [of Lichfield] and Wulfwi went over
sea, and there caused themselves to be ordained bishops. Wulfwi
succeeded to the bishoprick Ulf had had, he being living and driven
away V
Another Chronicle also mentions his death.
* 1067 And on that day (December 6), Christ Church at
Canterbury was burnt ; and Bishop Wulfwig died and is buried at his
Episcopal see at Dorchester V
The circumstances attending the expulsion of Ulf throw no light
upon the diocese of Oxford, but they belong to the story of the
reaction against the persistent course followed by Eadward in his
appointment of Norman bishops to the English sees. Wulfwi was the
last of the English bishops of Dorchester ; so that the notice of his
Norman successor, Remigius, and the removal of the see to Lincoln
belongs to the next chapter.
Politically, the importance of Oxford seems to have been recognized
by the circumstance of the great Gemot mentioned in the last chapter,
in which, under Cnut, the English law was adopted : and now another
great Gemot was held here in 1036 on the death of Cnut to choose his
successor. No business of greater importance could well have been
transacted than this in the then state of affairs. The supporters of the
English policy and those of the Danish policy (for under those two heads
probably most of the political differences might be grouped) had by
Cnut's good management been kept at peace. There were troubles
no doubt, but not such as to affect the unity of the nation. But now
there was not only the absence of the ruler to keep the nation together,
but the presence of rival claims which must be satisfied. The words
of one of the Chronicles are as follows : —
1 a.d. 1036. In this year died King Cnut at Shaftesbury. . . . And
immediately after his decease, there was a great assembly of all the
"Witan" at Oxford; and Earl Leofric and almost all the thanes
1 A.-S. Chroa. C, sub anno .
2 A.-S. Chron. D, sub anno. Both passages are given under Appendix A, § 65.
174 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
north of the Thames, and the " lithsmen " of London, chose Harold to
the government of all England, him and his brother Harthacnut, who
was in Denmark. And Earl Godwine and all the chief men of Wessex,
opposed it as long as they could, but they could not prevail aught
against it. And it was then resolved that JElfgyfu, Harthacnut's
mother, should dwell at Winchester with the king her son's " house
carls," and hold all Wessex under his authority. And Earl Godwine
was their most devoted man 1.'
The writers who follow vary this somewhat, but throw no especial
light upon it. Henry of Huntingdon interprets one part by paraphras-
ing it, 'elected Harold, that he might keep the kingdom for his
brother.' The probabilities are that there was a compromise ; but at
this distance of time it is impossible to discover the exact nature, even
supposing that those living then understood perfectly the conditions.
The result, however, turned out according to the broad lines which
seem to have been laid down, namely, that Harold Harefoot should
reign for a time, and Harthacnut should succeed him on his death.
Further, that meanwhile Harthacnut should rule Wessex as an under-
king. The latter fearing, as well he might, treachery, appointed as his
deputy, his mother Emma over the West Saxons, like as the Lady Ethel-
flsed had been Lady over the Mercians ; but the work of ruling was en-
trusted to Earl Godwine. In all probability Godwine's party were for
a more sweeping policy, with a view of restoring the English house,
instead of continuing the Danish house on the throne. The choice of
Harold cannot be very well accounted for, except on the principle of
compromise, since great doubts seem to be thrown by all writers as to
his parentage ; and his action after his accession to the throne certainly
would justify the opinion that he felt he was a pretender, and was not
in the right. If we can accept the statements in the Chronicles (and
it is difficult, considering the opportunities which the writers must have
had of recording independent opinions, to believe that their agreement
arises from other causes than the truth), he seems to have feared the
return of Harthacnut, and to have vented his animosity against Queen
Emma, his reputed father's queen ; inviting, too, the sons of Ethelred
and Emma, he caused Alfred to be blinded, and Edward only escaped
a similar act of brutality by fleeing into Normandy. On the whole,
then, Oxford cannot be said to be honoured by the decision of the
Gemot which was held here in 1035, and it is no further honour perhaps
1 This is taken from Chron. E. Chrons. C and D do not mention the Witena-
gemot. Chron. F mentions the election of Harold, but omils to mention that the
gemot was held at Oxford. Appendix A, § 66.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 175
that Oxford was the scene of Harold's death in 1040, which is thus
recorded in one of the Chronicles : —
' a.d. 1039. In this year King Harold died at Oxford on the xvith.
of the Kal. of April [Mar. 17th], and he was buried at Westminster1.'
Florence of Worcester, under 1040, writes, 'Harold, King of the
English, died at London11' Henry of Huntingdon follows the Chronicle
almost verbatim, but he places the event under the year 1040. William
of Malmesbury incidentally refers to Harold 'dying at Oxford in the
month of April' at the expiration of three years after 1036. Simeon
of Durham, and Roger de Hoveden, as usual, copy Florence of
Worcester. Incidentally, in a judgment or writ to which at least he
put his hand just before his death, we read of Harold lying grievously ill
at Oxford. The document is not dated, and therefore does not in any
way fix the exact year of his death. The question at issue seems
to have been a dispute about some rents at Sandwich between the two
rival houses situated close to each other at Canterbury, namely the
Christ Church house and the S.Augustine's house: and the plea
seems to have been that property belonging to the latter had been
alienated unjustly to the former by the king's officers. Whether the
words are those dictated by the king or only those of his clerk, they
were at least penned at Oxford.
1 Know then by this writing that Harold king &c. Then Archbishop
Eadsige when he knew this, and all the society at Christ Church took
counsel between them that iEIfgar monk of Christ Church, should be
sent to king Harold : and the king was then in Oxford very ill, so that
he lay in despair of his life. There was [present] Lyfing Bishop of
Defenascire [i. e. Crediton] with the king, and Thancred the monk
with him. Then came the messenger from Christ Church to the
Bishop, and he then forth to the king, and iElfgar the monk with him,
and Oswerd of Hergerdesham 3 and Thancred, and they said to the
king, &c V
The plea, and the judgment on it, do not concern us, but these
few lines seem to bring vividly before us the scene of Harold lying in
his sick chamber within the Castle precincts at Oxford, with the
bishop and others around him, and the intrusion of the two monks,
1 Here again Chron. E is the authority, and Chrons. C, D, and F omit all refer-
ence to Oxford. MS. F places the death of Harold in 1039, but Chrons. C and
D both place it in 1040. Appendix A, § 67.
2 Florence of Worcester in the same way makes the death of King Edmund to
have taken place at London, as already noted.
3 Probably Hariardesham of Domesday, now Harietsham, Kent.
* The original document is preserved in the collection of original charters,
Cottonian Library, Aug. II. Printed K. CD. No. 758, iv. p. 56. Appendix A, § 86.
i76 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
who had journeyed from Canterbury as a deputation, desiring to
obtain his direct authority in their trouble; and, further, the means
they adopted of gaining access to him are told so naturally, in the
few words quoted from the recital in the charter, that they convey a
clearer idea than the ordinary narratives of historians.
" Harthacnut, when he succeeded, seems to have been intent on
avenging the indignities which had been perpetrated towards his
mother by his predecessor, for he had the body of the late king dug
up at Westminster and cast into the marshland near, and so out of
consecrated ground; and further, in his brief career as king for about
two years, he seems only to have succeeded in drawing down the
wrath of the chroniclers in consequence of the extraordinary taxation
which he sanctioned. In no way does his reign shed any lustre on
the kingdom, nor does it bear upon the meeting of Oxford.
On Harthacnut's sudden death, at a marriage feast in June 1042,
the English party seem to have had their way clear before them :
and so the next year Eadward « the Confessor,' was hallowed king.
Elected king immediately on the death of Harthacnut, it is most
probable that he was in Normandy at the time, and the preparations
were such that he was not crowned till Easter in 1043, and then at
Winchester. No traces in any charter or in any of the historians
occur of his visiting Oxford. Yet one might have expected it, for it
is but a few miles across the meadows on the north of Oxford to the
place where he was born.
This fact we do not obtain from any chronicler, but from the chance
mention of it in a charter respecting a grant of land to his newly-
founded, or rather restored, abbey of Westminster. It runs as follows :—
'Eadward, king, greets Wlsy1, Bishop, and Gyrth, Earl, and all my
thanes in Oxnefordesyre kindly. And I would have you know that
have given to Christ and to Saint Peter, unto Westminster that
"cotlif" in which I was born by name Githslepe and one hide at
Mcrsce scot-free and gafol-free, with all the things therein that thereto
belong in wood and in field in meadow and in waters, with church
and with church-jurisdiction as fully and as largely and as free as it
stood to myself in my hands : so also as Elgiva Imma my mother at
my first birthday gave it to me for a provision-.'
. Wlsy might be Wulfeige, Bishop of Lichfield (1039-1058) J but more likely
Wulfwie Bishop of Dorchester (10,3-67), since the next four charters (K C. D.
M<-866 have respectively Wulfwi,Wlfsi Wlwi, and Wulfwi, aU obviously lefemng
to the same Bishop. Why the writ should be addressed to Gyrth, whose earldom
aooears to comprise Norfolk and Suffolk, presents a difficulty.
P?P nted in Kemble's Codex Diplomatic**, No. 86a, vol. iv. p. «* from MSL
Cott Faust, a. in, fol- 103. The MS. consists chiefly of a Register of charters
belonging to S. Peter's, Westminster. Appendix A, § 69.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. lJJ
We do not know the exact year when King Eadward was born, and
consequently have no means of even surmising the circumstance which
led Queen Emma iElfgifu to be at Islip at any particular time. It
may be that as the ' cotlif,' or little village, belonged to her, there was
something of a palace in it which might at times have provided a
residence for herself: traces of this were pointed to on the north side
of the church before the late farm improvements, but with very little
evidence of their being of an early age ; and even the font in which the
king was baptized * has been described and figured.
And just as we find no trace of Eadward having visited Oxford, so
neither does Oxford seem to play any part in the political events of
his long reign, till just within a few months of the end. At this time
an important ' Gemot ' was held here ; but the bearing of the same
upon the greatest of all events which was at hand, namely, the Norman
Conquest, cannot be shown without a brief reference to some of the
circumstances which preceded it.
Eadward was Norman on his mother's side, and being educated in
Normandy, all his sympathies were Norman and not English ; and the
English party in choosing him as their king could have little foreseen
what influence that choice would have in transferring the government
of England to a foreign sovereign. This choice, in effect, helped only
to a Danish rule being exchanged for a Norman rule. It need not
necessarily have been so, for the primary causes of William's success
were the political dissensions of the English leaders of the people : to
the same causes, indeed, which had subjected England first to the
ravages of the Danish hordes, and afterwards to the rule of a Danish
king. By the death of Harthacnut there had seemed some hope of
a united country, but that was not the result. The new divisions of the
country which were gradually effected during Eadward's reign were
the same in principle, though perhaps different in detail from what
they had been before : England was still divided into districts, almost
amounting to kingdoms, though they were known as earldoms. From
Egbert's time the country had never been one kingdom, except in a
very limited sense, and we now find in Eadward's reign not only the old
state of things existing, but very much the geographical distribution of
the old kingdoms of all recognized and restored. The kingdom of
1 Kennett in his Parochial Antiquities, Oxford, 1818, i. p. 69, writes: 'Besides
this charter, there is another standing memorial of the birth of King Edward at
Islip, the relics of the font wherein he was baptized, lately removed from the ruins
of a royal chapel in that town ; of which this account is given by an eye-witness
of it.' This font, as the architectural details show, was the work of the fourteenth
century
N
178 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the Northumbrians was under one earl, East Anglia under another,
Mercia under a third, and Wessex under a fourth ; the last being
Earl Godwin, the leader of the English party, and who with Bishop
Lyfing may be said to have been chiefly instrumental in setting
Eadward on the throne.
At the same time, there seem to have been subdivisions of these
earldoms, or, at least, there were several under-earls, though called
by the name of earls, just as under-kings were of old often called
kings. The territories belonging to these smaller earldoms are not
easy to define, as the earls were not set over single shires like the
ealdormen had been, but over groups of shires, which seem to have
been frequently shifting- ; and in attempting to assign to them their
several shires, according to the addresses and signatures of the
charters which are preserved, several anomalies present themselves.
It is dangerous of course to depend too much upon such authority ;
first, because some charters are of doubtful character, and copyists
may have inserted the description according to the light of their know-
ledge ; and secondly, there may have been special reasons in some
cases for writs being addressed to a particular earl on account of his
holding property in another earldom than his own. Still, making
this allowance, the divisions and subdivisions were complicated.
Moreover, in addition to the subdivisions on the one hand, there
appeared to be, on the other, a tendency of the earldoms to fall into
two groups, as the sequel shows, — the south and the north. The south
under Earl Godwin, with English interests, the north under ^Elfgar,
or his successors, with seemingly the desire for independence of
English rule, and with a considerable remnant of Danish interests1.
The part which Oxfordshire played in this it is difficult to determine.
Naturally it would be Mercian, and would have passed to Earl ^Elfgar
who succeeded his father, Earl Leofric, in the earldom in 1057; but if
we accept Florence of Worcester's account, it was in 1051, grouped with
Gloucestershire and Somerset and Wiltshire in an earldom ruled over
by Swegen, one of Godwine's sons2 ; and there seems perhaps in this
something of the nature of a survival of the separation of Oxfordshire
from the kingdom of Mercia in 912, when Eadward the Elder took it
from the rule of the Lady of the Mercians.
1 The Danish interests seem to have been recognized, e.g. in the charter [K. C. D.
804] of Ealdred, Bishop of Worcester, who calls to witness, together with the earls
Leofi ic and Odda and several others, ' all the oldest thanes in Worcestershire,
Danish and English.'
8 Florence of Worcester, sub anno 1051. Man. Hist. Brit. p. 604.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 179
On the other hand, in the Domesday Survey, Oxford itself is re-
turned as having been held by the Mercian earl iElfgar in the time
of King Eadward, and it is reasonable therefore to suppose the shire
also1. It seems clear, also, from a charter respecting a grant of land
to S. Alban's Abbey, that before Leofric's death Oxfordshire was
within his earldom ; the first signature being that of Ulf, Bishop [of
Dorchester, elected 1050], the next, Earl Leofric, and the third, the
Abbot of Abingdon. The last signatures are Godwine, the Reeve
(praeposi/us) of the city of Oxford, and Wulfwine, the Reeve of the
county of Oxford (that is, the Portreeve and the Sheriff at this time),
and all the citizens of Oxford2.
The Gemot at Oxford, however, is more nearly concerned with the
earldom of Northumbria. On the death of Earl Siward in 1055, King
Eadward bestowed the earldom on a younger son of Godwine, by
name Tostig, towards whom he seems to have evinced great friend-
ship ; and this close bonding of the great earldom of the West Saxons
with that of the Northumbrians was a bold though perhaps hazardous,
stroke of policy in the direction of uniting the whole of England, as it
had not yet been united. Whether or not he was a fit man to wield
so much power may be doubtful. Certainly, as events proved, his
appointment was attended with most untoward circumstances. He
seems, however, not to have been wanting in prowess. WThen
Harold went on his expedition in May 1063 against Gruffydd, the
Welsh king, Tostig seems to have rendered him valuable assistance,
and it may be mentioned in passing, that one of the chroniclers intro-
duces the name of Oxford incidentally in connection with the campaign.
1 The signatures and addresses of the charters do not help us much. Writs re-
specting Islip and Langtune, i. e. Launton (K. C. D. Nos. 862 and 865), are addressed
to Wulwi, Bp. of Dorchester (1053-1067), to Earl Gyrth, and to all the king's thanes
in Oxfordshire. But Gyrth was Earl of the East Anglian shires of Suffolk and Norfolk.
On the one hand, though some writs relating to property in Suffolk and Norfolk are
addressed to Bishop ^Egelmar of Elmham (1047-70), and Girth (e.g. K. C. D. Nos.
873, 874, 875, 881), on the other hand most are addressed to Bishop ^Egelmar and
Earl iElfgar of Mercia (e.g. K. C. D. 876, 877, 878, 879, 880, 882, 883, 884, 905).
This is but one illustration of the difficulties referred to.
2 From MS. Cott. Nero D. I. fol. 150 b. A volume containing documents re-
lating to S. Alban's Abbey transcribed in the thirteenth century. Printed in Codex
Diplo?naticus, No. 950, vol. iv. p. 284, but much more accurately in Gesta Abbatum,
S. Albani, Rolls Series, 1 863, vol. i. p. 39. The name of the place, given in the former
as ' Cyrictuna,' is Cyric-tiwa (in Domesday Tewa, and also Teova), now Great Tew,
in Oxfordshire. We find amongst the signatures ^Egelric of ' Glimtune'; Brihtwin
of ' Daedintun,' Leofwine of i Bartune,' confirming the fact that it was situated to
the North of Oxford. It is granted by a certain widow Tova to Abbot Leofstan,
and all the convent of S. Alban's. The date is restricted to 1050-52, the former the
date when Swegen was inlawed, the latter the date when Ulf was outlawed.
180 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
The Chronicles refer to the campaign very briefly, while Florence of
Worcester names I>ristol as the place whence Harold sailed with his
fleet ; but Geoffrey Gaimar, the French chronicler, who lived very near
the time, and so had possibly authority for what he wrote, states : —
1 Then went there Tosti from the North, Harold from South, from
Oxenford l.'
Harold may well have taken Oxford on his way to Bristol. It may
imply more than this, that the campaign was arranged and settled in
Oxford, and that at Oxford the northern and southern forces met
before they started westward.
Probably the fact of Tostig being the son of Godwine, so closely as-
sociated with the West Saxon kingdom, was the main cause of his
unpopularity with the Northumbrians, and certain it is that the people of
his earldom revolted from him, instigated no doubt by leaders who had
nothing to lose, but everything to gain by the revolt. It may well
therefore have been more his misfortune than his fault, and the charges
against him may have been either fabrications or exaggerations.
Still he was not able to quell the revolt, and if it is true that he was
hunting with the king in Wiltshire at the time, it looks rather as if he
was negligent of the welfare of his earldom ; things too, no doubt,
were done during his absence in his name, by his subordinates, which
he would not have done himself. Moreover there is little doubt but that
a neighbouring power had been busy in fomenting if not originating
the discord, and this is shown by the fact that the rebels held a
gemot at York, on October 3rd (according to Florence of Worcester),
that they deposed earl Tostig and declared him an outlaw, and at the
same time elected as their earl Morkere, the son of ^Elfgar, earl of
Mercia. iElfgar, from what is known of circumstances previously, was
not to be depended on ; he evidently consulted his own interests
before his country's ; he had been proved to be to all intents and
purposes a traitor, and may therefore before his death, which happened
in 1062, have set going the rise of the rebellion, though he left it to his
sons to complete the work. The outlawry of one earl and the election
of another, without the king's consent, was in itself nothing less than
rebellion, and Morkere must well have known it. The object he and
his brother Eadwine had in view was evidently to separate the king-
dom into two parts, with Mercia and Northumbria as one kingdom,
and Wessex and whatever counties might be disposed to join as another.
The political action on the part of the men interested was accompanied,
as the tendency is of all such movements, by the rioting of a mob and
1 « Done i alat Tosti del north, Harold del suth de Oxenford.' V Estorie des
Engles, line 5075. Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 825.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 181
acts of murder, violence, and plunder. Not only they immediately
slew all Tostig's faithful servants they could find, and broke open the
earl's treasury, but proceeded to march southwards, and this, if we
accept the statements of the Chronicles, under the open leadership of
Morkere himself; and this brings the story to the passage in the
Chronicle which concerns Oxford : —
1 a.d. 1065. And then, very shortly after, there was a great " gemot "
at Northampton ; and so at Oxford, on the day of S. Simon and S.
Jude (Oct. 28th). And Earl Harold was there, and would work their
reconciliation if he could, but he could not1, for all his earldom
unanimously renounced and outlawed him [Tostig] and all who raised
up lawlessness with him ; because he first robbed God and bereaved
all those of life and of land over whom he had power. And they then
took to them Morkere for earl, and Tostig went over sea.'
In two other Chronicles, viz. D and E, it is recorded that there was
at this time a Gemot at Northampton. The passage runs thus: —
' Then came Earl Harold to meet them, and they laid an errand on
him to King Eadward, and also sent messengers with him, and prayed
that they might have Morkere for their Earl. And the king granted
it, and sent Harold again to them at Northampton on the Eve of
S. Simon and S. Jude's mass ; and he made known the same to them,
and gave his hand thereto ; and he there renewed Cnut's law1.'
One version does not discredit the other, for a Gemot may have
been held at Oxford as well as at Northampton, and Harold may
have been at both ; for it will be observed that the one meeting was
held the day after the other, and it was quite possible for Harold, even
with an absolute adherence to dates, to have gone direct from North-
ampton to Oxford, in the twenty-four hours, though it would have
involved a ride of nearly sixty miles. In the then state of the king-
dom, and the important issues at stake, such rapidity was necessary.
Florence of Worcester, copied more or less verbally by other writers,
mentions the meeting at Oxford as well as that at Northampton: —
' Afterwards nearly all those of his followers [comitatus] assembled
together at Northampton and met Harold Earl of the West Saxons,
and the others whom the King, at Tosti's request, had sent to them in
order to restore peace. Where first of all, and afterwards at Oxford,
on the feast of the apostles SS. Simon and Jude, they all unanimously
opposed their assent, when Harold and several of the others tried to
reconcile Tosti to them'2.'
1 The first is from A.-S. Chron. C. Chron. D and E omit the mention of the
Gemot at Oxford, and Chron. F has ceased with the year 1058 ; Chron. D, however,
mentions fully, and Chron. E very briefly, the circumstance of Harold being sent to
Northampton. Appendix A, §§ 70-71.
2 Flor. of Wore, sub anno 1065. Mm. Hist. Brit. p. 612. Appendix A, § 72.
1 8a THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Henry of Huntingdon has evidently used Chronicles D and E,
and only mentions the meeting at Northampton ; while William of
Malmesbury confines his remarks to an account of the revolt.
The writer of the Vita jEJuuardi Regis, a work which must have
been composed between 1066 and 1074, after speaking of the
slaughter at York and Lincoln, states that a vast number of rebels
massed together continued their course — ' like a whirlwind or storm '
— past the middle of England till they reached Axoncuordex. There is
no doubt that Oxford is meant, although the spelling is singular.
This implies that the rebellious mob were accompanying the leaders.
Harold might therefore have made a stand, and attempted to treat at
Northampton, but might have been obliged, in consequence of the
overwhelming mass of insurgents, to fall back upon Oxford, and continue
the Gemot there, since a Gemot held under the former circumstances
could not have been attended with any satisfactory results.
The importance of what was done at this Gemot at Oxford cannot
be over-estimated. The king, it would appear, was favourable to making
at least an attempt to crush the rebellion, which was instigated, there
could be but little doubt, by the house of ^Elfgar, as they would be the
only gainers ; but earl Harold was for listening to the demands of the
leaders for the sake of peace.
There is no reason to give credence to the speeches which different
historians put into the mouths of the respective parties ; we have before
us certain elements, and we have also before us the results of their
combination, and we are able to take perhaps a more unbiassed view
than those who lived at the time, and who were in one way or another
affected by the revolt. It is clear that Harold anticipated that by
sacrificing his brother to the insurgents, he would win the allegiance
of the Northumbrians on the one hand, and yet, on the other, not lose
the friendship of his brother so completely that any harm would come
of it. He made a great mistake in both his anticipations. He gained
only the contempt of the lawless bands who had come down from the
north ravaging the country wherever they went, by condoning their
offences. At the same time he gained only the enmity of the steadier
men, whose lands had been then ravaged by those bands. The
Chronicle in simple terms speaks of the great harm they did : —
'And the Rythrenan did great harm about Northampton while he
[Harold] went on their errand, inasmuch as they slew men and burned
houses, and corn, and took all the cattle which they could come at,
1 From the Harleian MS. (No. 526), printed in Lives of Edward the Confessor,
Rolls Series, p 422, Vita Edwardi, line 1157. The MS. is of the twelfth century.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 183
that was many thousand : and many hundred men they took and led
north with them ; so that the shire and the other shires that were nigh
them were for many winters the worse V
Morkere, who led the revolt, would have been the chief gainer by the
decision of the Gemot ; but there is not the remotest chance of any
spark of gratitude having been aroused in his heart by Harold's exhi-
bition of weakness. Lastly, in his treatment of his brother, Harold made
not only an enemy, but one whose enmity, as it turned out, was the most
formidable of all with which he had to contend, because it was exhibited
at the most inopportune moment which could possibly have occurred.
Before turning the leaf which brings us to the end of the story, it
may be worth while to notice that, according to Chronicle D, an im-
portant clause in the submission agreed to by Harold acting with the
king's authority, but as already said on his own judgment and against
that of the king, was ' that Cnut's law was renewed.' This is some-
what striking from the fact that it was at Oxford the Gemot of 1018
was held in which occurs the passage 'then the Danes and Angles were
unanimous for Eadgar's law2/ It is impossible that the phrase means
only that the kingdom should be under one law, that is, the laws of
the land should be obeyed : for when the two passages are put into
juxtaposition, there is evidently something more than this implied.
It is believed that these are the only two instances which occur in the
Chronicles of the agreement as to the law to be observed at any
Gemot, and therefore their interpretation must be based upon the
several circumstances attending the two occasions on which the words
were used. The mention in both instances of the special law implies
a priori that at least there was another code in existence, and there
cannot be much doubt that there were two, namely the Danish code
which had been tacitly allowed to make its way in the land occupied
by the Danes ; and the English code, which was understood by the
expression of Eadgar's law. There had been, roughly speaking, a
northern kingdom, and a southern kingdom, and a northern law, and
a southern law. In 10 18 Oxford was the scene of an agreement
made by a Witan, presided over by a truly Danish king, that the
English law should be the law of England. In 1065 is held another
Gemot in the same place, assembled by the English king's orders, and
nominally presided over by his representative, acquiescing in the
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicles D, E, sub anno 1065, and continuation of passage
quoted from D, E, ante, p. 181. In E the unknown word ' Rythrenan' appears as
' Northernan men': but it is open to question whether it is not a conjectural
emendation of the compiler of Chron. E, and that the meaning of the original
word had been lost. Appendix A, § 73. 2 See ante, p. 161.
[84 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
decision that the Danish code should be the code of England. There
is Strong probability therefore in this distinction recorded by the
Chronicles being of set purpose, when we remember that Harold was
dealing with a large and powerful body, representing especially the
land which was so long under the Dane law, and which was now again
separating itself, in fact, though acknowledging a nominal obedience to
the government of the rest of England. If this is the case it is very
humiliating, and the submission of 1065 must be put in the same
category as that of 1 o 1 3, the result of Ethelred's incompetence, of which
William of Malmesbury, paraphrasing the Chronicle, writes : ' Soon
coming to the southern districts, Sweyn obliged the men of Oxford
and Winchester to obey his laws1.' If this was but one of the results
it is not a Gemot of which Oxford can be proud. But the worst was
to come.
King Eadward died on January 5, 1066, and Harold had been duly
elected king. The Norman writers, of course, find numerous flaws in
the election ; but the object is so palpably by way of apology for
William's seizure of the English crown that they are not deserving of
serious attention. He was elected no doubt by the Witan in London,
as representative probably as circumstances would admit.
By May of the same year Tostig, the banished earl, had brought
together a fleet with a view of regaining that of which he naturally
thought himself wrongly deprived, and was attacking the southern shores
of England. At the same time observing the division in the kingdom
which Eadwine and Morkere had effected, a Norwegian king, Harold
Hardrada, following in the wake of the Danish kings and jarls of old,
came to see what he could gain by an incursion upon the unfortunate
country. The banished earl threw his lot in with the Norwegian king, and
it is suggested that he even prompted him to the act ; certain it is that
by September, 1066, the two were together in command of a large
army, and marching to York. How far Eadwine and Morkere really
attempted to defend their own kingdom against the foreign enemy and
the former earl, cannot be well ascertained ; all that is clear is that
they were unsuccessful and appealed to the English king for help.
Harold generously, without thinking of his own danger, though he
might well have known what was in preparation on the coast of
Normandy, and though in ill health, obeyed the summons, and hastened
so rapidly to the scene of action, that before September closed he was
at Stamford Bridge, and won back, as it appears in the sequel, rather
for Eadwine and Morkere than for England, the kingdoms of Northum-
1 See ante, p. 153.
OXFORD BEFORE THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 185
bria and Mercia, which were at the moment at the mercy of Harold
Hardrada and Tostig.
Scarcely had the victory been won, when the news of William's
landing on the coast of Sussex arrived. King Harold ought, mean-
while, to have been gathering his army in his own kingdom of Wessex ;
and if this had been the case William would, at his landing, have had
far different circumstances to contend with, and the unequal battle
near Hastings (to the place of which Orderic Vital alone of all
historians has given the name of Senlac1) would probably never
have been fought. Of course, as the Norman influence had been
allowed to grow to a great extent during King Eadward's reign, it is
possible that eventually England might have been subjected to the
Norman rule ; but the decisive victory gained by the Normans on
October 14th, 1066, which led to the coronation of Duke William
at Westminster on Christmas Day of the same year, was due to the
journey to York to resist Tostig. Eadwine and Morkere of course kept
their own men back ; they were glad enough to cry to Harold for aid
in their need, but with gratitude as absent as when Harold con-
firmed them in their aggression upon the kingdom to the detriment
of his own brother's welfare. These two earls had taken the best of
West Saxon blood to help them in Mercia, but evidently declined
to send a single man to help Harold in Wessex.
It was to be expected. The events, as already said, without the aid
of historians to narrate imaginary conversations and suggest possible
motives, tell their own tale. The decision of the Gemot at Oxford
was at the bottom of the whole matter. At that Gemot, contrary to
the king's wish, Harold listened to the pleas of rebels, and trusting
Eadwine and Morkere, threw over Tostig ; all the rest followed in due
course. It was in 1009, at Oxford, that the betrayal of the northern
rulers, Sigeferth and Morkere, by the old traitor, Eadric, took place.
In 1065 it was no less a betrayal of the patriot Harold, by the no less
traitors, in fact, Eadwine and another Morkere. The complement of
the one was the subjection of England to Cnut, the Danish king.
The direct result of the other was the leaving England open to the easy
victory of William, the Norman duke, when he landed in Sussex.
1 There is no mention of this name in the charters concerning the foundation of
Battle Abbey on the spot.
CHAPTER X.
Oxford during the Twenty Years after the
Norman Conquest.
After the great battle, Duke William's march to London was com-
paratively easy. Kent, Sussex, Surrey, and Hampshire had been too
severely taxed in supplying men to meet the Conqueror on his landing
to offer any serious resistance. In fact from these counties nearly the
whole of the forces employed by Harold must have been procured, for
from the north bank of the Thames it would appear that he had
obtained hardly any assistance whatever. We know little of what
occurred after the battle, for the few lines which comprise all the record
left by the two or three historians on which we have to rely, are very
imperfect, if not contradictory. But as the neighbourhood of Oxford
is by some made the scene of an important event in the Conqueror's
march before he was crowned king, and as Oxford itself is made by
nearly all historians to have been besieged either immediately before,
or soon after his coronation, it is necessary to examine somewhat
closely the evidence on which such statements are based.
Two only of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles remain ] which record the
details of the conquest. Of these Chronicle D is the fullest, but in
it the whole story of the conquest is summed up in the few lines
following : —
' 1066 . . . And Count William went afterwards again to Hastings, and
there awaited whether the nation would submit to him ; but when he
perceived that they would not come to him he went up with all his army
which was left to him, and what had afterwards come over sea to him,
and harried all that part which he passed over until he came to Beorh-
hamstede. And there came to meet him Archbishop Ealdrcd, and
Eadgar child, and Earl Eadwine, and Earl Morkere, and all the best
men of London, and these from necessity submitted when the greatest
harm had been done ; and they gave hostages, and swore oaths to him ;
1 The original Winchester copy A, or rather its continuation, has become so
meagre in its notes, with sometimes not a dozen lines to twenty years, that it is
quite useless. The Canterbury copy B ceased with the year 975. The Chronicle
C, supposed to have been compiled at Abingdon, ceased with the battle at Stamford
Bridge in 1066; while Chronicle F ceased with 1056. There remains therefore
only Chronicle D, supposed to have been compiled at Worcester, and Chronicle
E, supposed to have been compiled at Peterborough, and which is preserved in the
Bodleian Library.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 187
and he promised them that he would be a kind lord to them ; and yet
during this, they harried all that they passed over. Then on Midwinter's
day [December 25], Archbishop Ealdred hallowed him king at West-
minster ; and he pledged him on Christ's book, and also swore, before
he would set the crown on his head, that he would govern this nation
as well as any king before him had best done, if they would be faith-
ful to him. Nevertheless he laid a very heavy contribution on the
people, and then, in Lent, went over sea to Normandy, and took with
him Archbishop Stigand, and iEgelnoth, abbot of Glastonbury, and
Eadgar child, and Earl Eadwine, and Earl Morkere, and Earl Waltheof,
and many other good men of England V
In Chronicle E we find a still shorter summary, as follows : —
1 And the while Count William landed at Hastings on S. Michael's
mass-day ; and Harold came from the north and fought against him
before his army had all come, and there he fell, and his two brothers,
Gyrth and Leofwine ; and William subdued the land, and came to
Westminster, and Archbishop Ealdred hallowed him king ; and men
paid him tribute and gave him hostages, and afterwards bought their
land V
Florence of Worcester, writing before 1 1 1 8, follows Chronicle D,
though in other words, and apparently without other material: —
1 Meanwhile Duke William ravaged Sussex, Kent, Southamptonshire,
• Surrey, Middlesex, and Hertford, and ceased not to burn towns and
kill men, till he came to the vill which is called Beorcham, where
Archbishop Aldred, Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester, Walter, Bishop of
Hereford, Eadgar the Atheling, Earls Eadwin and Morcar, and several
nobles from London, with many others came to him, and gave hostages,
and made submission to him, and swore fidelity. And with these he
made a treaty ; nevertheless he allowed his army to burn towns and
to plunder. . . . And on Christmas Day he was consecrated with great
honour by Aldred, Archbishop of York, at Westminster V
Simeon of Durham (or at least the writer of the Chronicle bearing
his name, circa 1130), follows the above verbatim4, as also Roger of
Hoveden writing circa 11 75. William of Malmesbury, writing about
1 1 20, seems not to have come across a Chronicle of the D type, with any
mention of Beorhhamstede, and it is probable that he has only extended
Chronicle E, adding his own inferences.
' By degrees William marched on with his army (as became a con-
queror) not in a hostile but in a royal manner, and went to London,
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D, sub anno. Appendix A, § 74.
2 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle E, sub anno. Appendix A, § 75.
3 Florence of Worcester, Chronicon. Printed in Mm. Hist. Brit. p. 615. Ap-
pendix A, § 76.
4 Simeon of Durham, De Gestis Regum Anglorum. Printed in Twisden's
Scriptores Decern, col. 195. Roger of Hoveden. Rolls Series, 1868, vol. i. p. 117.
1 88 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the chief city of the kingdom ; and immediately all the citizens poured
forth to meet him on the way with welcome; a crowd rushed forth
from all the gates to greet him, the nobles at their head, especially
Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Aldred of York; for a few
days before Edwin and Morcard, the brothers who had so much ex-
pectation, when they heard in London of Harold's death, had entreated
the citizens to raise one or other of them on the throne, and when
they had found their endeavours vain they had departed to North-
umbria, imagining according to their own ideas that William would
never come thither. The other nobles would have chosen Edgar
had they had the Bishops amongst their supporters. . . . Then he
(William) having been undoubtedly proclaimed king, was crowned on
Christmas Day by Archbishop Aldred '.'
Henry of Huntingdon, writing in 1135, compresses the whole into
a couple of lines.
1 William having gained so great a victory was received by the people
of London peaceably, and was crowned at Westminster by Aldred,
Archbishop of York V
William of Poitiers, however, writing perhaps soon after the event
itself, seems to have heard a different story altogether. He knows
nothing of Beorhhamstede or Beorcham, but he takes William across
the Thames to a certain ' Guarengeford,' which has been supposed
(and probably rightly) to be meant for Wallingford. After mentioning
the capture of Dover and the submission of the men of Canterbury, he
refers to Archbishop Stigand and other magnates of the kingdom dis-
cussing at London who should succeed Harold, ' while he who was to
be their actual king was hastening on his way.' He then writes : —
'The five hundred of the Norman cavalry which had been sent for-
ward by William, put to flight the company of soldiers which had
sallied forth against him, and drove them back within the walls of the
city. In addition to considerable slaughter, they burnt whatever
buildings they found on this side of the river. . . . The Duke then
marching forward in whatever direction he pleased, and crossing the
river Thames, both by the ford and by the bridge, reached the town
of Guarengefort. Stigand, the Metropolitan Archbishop, coming
to this very place, delivered himself into his hands Thence pro-
1 William of Malmesbury, Gcsta Rcgum, lib. iii. § 247. Engl. Hist. Soc. ed.
1840, vol. ii. p. 421. Appendix A, § 77.
2 Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglornm. Rolls Series, 1879, P- 2°4-
Appendix A, § 78. The very peaceful entry into London, and the welcome given
by the citizens, as recorded or imagined by William of Malmesbury and Henry of
Huntingdon, seems to be the view popularly followed by later chroniclers: e. g.
Wyke's Chronicle {Awiaks Monastin. Rolls Scries, iv. p. 7) has ' assecuto tarn
felici triumpho, dux cum suis pompatice proccdens, primo civitatem Wyntoniae,
deinde civitatem Londoniae brevissimo labore, nullo sibi resisiente, pessundedit.'
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 189
ceeding forward, immediately that London was in sight, there came
out to meet him the chief persons of the city, and they delivered up
themselves and all the city to be obedient to him, just as the people of
Canterbury had already done V
It is later on, and after William's coronation, that he makes Eadwine
and Morkere submit ; thus : —
' Having departed out of London he spent some days in a neighbour-
ing place, Bercingis. . . . There came to offer obedience to him there
Edwine and Morcard ; the chief of almost all the English in rank and
power, the renowned sons of that Algard ; and they seek his pardon V
It will be observed that the more complete continuation of the Anglo-
Saxon Chronicle brings William at once from Sussex to Beorham-
stede. There a treaty is made and he proceeds to Westminster to be
crowned. The less complete, takes him from Sussex to Westminster
without narrating any intervening circumstance except what is con-
tained under the words ' subdued the land V Florence of Worcester,
enlarging upon the first of the two, incorporates his inferences
into the history. He infers that William would have passed through
part of Sussex, Kent, Hampshire, Surrey, Middlesex and Hertford-
shire, and therefore he adds that he ravaged those counties. By his
introducing Hertfordshire, he may perhaps be said to imply that he
understood the ' Beorhamstede ' of the Chronicle to mean Berkham-
stead, though he writes the name Beorcham. All this, however, is
ignored by William of Malmesbury and Henry of Huntingdon, who
make Duke William enter London at once, and that peacefully ; while
it may be said to be contradicted by William of Poitiers. None of the
three seem to have heard of Berkhamstead, but the last has either
heard or has invented the story that Duke William attempted to enter
1 William of Poitiers, Gesta Guillelmi Ducis. Printed in Duchesne's Historia
Normannorum Scriptores, Paris, 161 9, p. 205. We are dependent wholly upon
the printed copy. There was only one MS., but as to whether it was the writer's
autograph or an imperfect transcript there is difference of opinion. Originally in
the Cottonian Library, it was lent to Duchesne to print from. It appears he never
returned it, and, if in existence at all, it is probably in some foreign library. It
seems William of Poitiers was born at Preaux 1020 ; he became Chaplain to King
William, and finally Archdeacon of Lisieux. Appendix A, § 79. William of
Jumieges (who is said to have died 1090, though his history is continued to 1 137)
has a passage similar in some respects, and probably based upon it, if both are not
based on some common original, and the divergences due to the inventive powers of
the two historians. Appendix A, § 80.
2 William of Poitiers, Ibid. p. 208. Appendix A, § 81. At the same place
and apparently at the same time he recounts that many other nobles made peace.
3 And yet this being the Chronicle supposed to have been compiled at Peter-
borough, it was to have been expected that if he went to Berkhamstead, the cir-
cumstance would have found some record in it.
190 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
London, that the Londoners met him, and that he drove them back ;
and that he afterwards crossed the Thames partly by bridge and partly
by ford to a place on the other side, to which the chronicler has given
the name of Garengford. After the coronation he makes the king go to
Barking1, which is unknown to all the others, and which has a dan-
gerous likeness to Berkhamstead, or at least to ' Beorcham.'
The variations, however, which make the stories still more inconsistent
are the names of the chief Englishmen who met Duke William at the
respective places. In the continuation of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
we read of the Archbishop of York, Eadgar /Etheling (the chosen king),
Earls Eadwine and Morkere, and all the best men of London, meeting
William. Florence of Worcester recites these names and adds (either
because he thought they ought to be there, or else because his copy of
the Chronicle contained the names), Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester,
and Walter, Bishop of Hereford, being Bishops from his own part of
the country. He alters ' all the best men of London ' into ' several
nobles from London.' William of Malmesbury makes, besides the
Archbishop of York, also the Archbishop of Canterbury come out and
meet him; while as to Eadwine and Morkere, he says that they
had previously departed for Northumbria. William of Poitiers makes
no Archbishop of York meet him; but when he had gained the
Mercian side of the Thames, he makes only Stigand, Archbishop of
Canterbury come to the place of meeting : he makes the chief persons
come out to welcome William when he is close to London ; while
some time after the coronation he makes Eadwin and Morkere submit
at Barking.
It is useless to search for facts amongst later writers. Orderic Vital,
who was writing this part of his history about the year n 24-1 126,
does not help us. He quotes by name Florence of Worcester 2, but for
the march of Duke William after the battle, he follows only William of
Poitiers, whom he evidently looks upon as the chief authority 3. He
1 The reference to Barking would have had a greater appearance of probability had
it been named in connection with William's fleet, which could scarcely have remained
all this while at Pevensey. One would have expected it would have come up the
Thames before his coronation rather than after ; since a fleet on the river would
have been of great assistance towards his taking London. After his coronation,
however, he might have visited Barking, if his fleet had been harboured in the
' creek ' near this place.
- He calls him John of Worcester (bk. iii. cap. 21). And this arises probably
from the fact thai one of the continuators of Florence's work was named John.
The MS. in C.C.C. Library, Oxford, has the name John as one of the writers, and
as it was written at Worcester, it is probably the copy Orderic Vital saw.
3 Orderic Vital, bk. iii. cap. 21 (15), for the meeting at Wallingford ; bk. iv,
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 191
also refers to the poem by Guy of Amiens, which he had seen1. On
the whole, however, for the events of the close of 1066, he seems to
have had no other material than what we possess ourselves.
This material, as has been seen, is far from satisfactory, and though
by leaving out here and there the discrepancies, the residue may be
worked up into a consecutive and consistent series of events, such a
process amounts to making history, not writing it. Amidst a mass of
contradictory evidence it is impossible to arrive at any sure con-
clusion. We have no means of cross-examining the witnesses, and
if we had, we should probably be surprised to find upon what slight
evidence they based their assertions. William of Poitiers, where he can
be tested, seems to possess little idea of strict chronological sequence
of events. That the Conqueror should, after the battle, march for
London, is but natural, but whether he was welcomed or not is a
question which seems to be made a matter of political opinion rather
than a matter of fact. William of Poitiers implies that he was met, at
first, with hostility, and that this obliged him to go up the Thames
to a ford2, in order to cross over, and that Stigand met him there. It
must be remembered that it is on this fact, and this alone, that all
the evidence for William's march to Wallingford is based. It is,
however, highly improbable that Stigand should journey all the way
to Wallingford to meet the Conqueror; while it is certain that the
place being on the Wessex side, William could not have crossed over
to the place of meeting. Yet the circumstance of the meeting is less
likely to be a fabrication than that the name of the place where they
met is an error.
It is, however, comparatively easy to piece together such details as
will fit out of the various stories ; and more easy still to discover
reasons for the results which such mosaic work produces. It is easy,
for instance, to make Wallingford, Berkhamstead, Westminster, and
Barking the scenes of successive stages in the acknowledgment of
William as King of England : at the first the Archbishop of Canter-
cap. 1, for the meeting at Barking. Duchesne's Historic/, Normannorum Scriptores,
p. 506.
1 It has not been thought necessary to quote the poem attributed to Guy of Amiens,
De Bello Hastingensi Carmen. Though he was attached to the court, as Orderic
Vital mentions, bk. iv. cap. 5 (4), he does not in his poem, as regards the events
treated of, throw any new light upon them. It will be found printed, Mon. Hist.
Brit. p. 856.
2 It is quite possible that in writing of the Conqueror fording the Thames,
William of Poitiers added the only name of a ford with which he was acquainted.
It may be remembered that it was Wallingford which King Alfred introduced
into his edition of Orosius when he referred to Julius Caesar crossing the Thames,
simply because this ford was known to him (see ante, p. 72, note 1).
192 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
bury; at the second the Archbishop of York and certain nobles; at
the coronation, the people of London ; and lastly at Barking, the
Northern Earls, Eadwine and Morkere.'
It is also easy to imagine that William, anticipating opposition from
Eadwine and Morkere, should, without waiting to subdue London, have
marched into Mercian territory to meet them before they could gather
their forces together, and from considerations of a military nature he
might be thought not to have crossed the Thames until he reached
Wallingford ; here he would find the Icknield way, which, running
beneath the Western slopes of the Chiltern Hills, owed its creation to
the Britons, but had been trodden by Roman, Saxon, and Danish in-
vaders alike. Instead, however, of continuing along this ancient track
till he reached Dunstable, where it joined the Waetling Street, by which
he would have a direct road into London, he might have turned
off by Tring, and passing through the opening which occurs here in
the line of the Chiltern Hills, and following the course now followed
both by a canal and railway, as well as by an important road, he
might have passed Berkhamstead on his way1; here, on account of the
importance of the situation, a mediaeval castle was afterwards erected,
here he might have halted, and here ambassadors might have been sent
to meet him. Still so much of this rests on supposition, or at most on
the chance mention of the two names, that it cannot be reasonably
regarded as real history. The method by which the results are
obtained bears too near a resemblance to that by which some of the
myths referred to in the second chapter of this treatise have obtained
a definite shape, so as to be looked upon as facts, or by which the
1 The name of Bcorh-hamstede, it will be remembered, occurs but in a single MS.,
and therefore we have no corroborative evidence that it is rightly given or correctly-
written. The Chronicle too which contains it is that which is supposed to
have been compiled at Worcester ; that which was compiled at Peterborough
knows nothing of it. It may perhaps be only a coincidence, but there is a story
told in one of the St. Alban's Chronicles, viz. that of Thomas Walsingham (Gesta
Abbatum, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 47), in which King William and the Archbishop
of Canterbury on a certain occasion, are present at Berkhamstead, and the King
'pro bono pads' swears upon the relics of St. Alban to obey the laws which King
Eadward had appointed. But then Lanfranc is given as the name of the Archbishop,
and he did not become so till 1070: still the consideration suggests itself, whether
the compiler of Chronicle D, having a note of this, may not have put Berkhamstead
as the place of meeting in 1066. On the other hand, there may have been
another name in some Chronicle for Florence of Worcester to have copied it Beor-
cham ; at least it does not look as if he used the Worcester Chronicle D, which we
now possess. Possibly the compiler of the Chronicle meant it for Berkhamstead
in Hertfordshire, though that is spelt Bercha'sled and Bercheh'asted in the two or
three entries in the Domesday Survey. The Berkamystede and Berhamstede of the
Charters (K. CD. 39, 1005) are Berstead, near Maidstone in Kent, while Beorgan-
stede (K. CD. 18, 663) can only be Bersted, near Chichester in Sussex.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 193
legends described in the fifth chapter have come to be accepted as
historical narratives. The whole evidence which a witness brings for-
ward must be weighed, not that part only which can be reconciled
with that of other witnesses ; in this respect it is considered that the
evidence for the march round by Wallingford and Berkhamstead fails,
and therefore that there are not sufficient grounds for accepting the
theory that Duke William, previous to his coronation, marched
through the Oxford district; and consequently there is no reason to
suppose that at this time Oxford was besieged by him, or in any
special manner surrendered to him 1.
In considering the next occasion suggested for the siege of Oxford,
and the evidence which we have of the same, there is one important
fact to be remembered, on which all historians agree, and which, in
a way is connected with Oxford, namely, that Eadwine and Morkere
yielded without striking a blow. Harold, at the Gemot of Oxford in
1065, had surrendered to these two earls the whole of the north and
centre of England ; he had supported them in the condemnation of
his own brother as an outlaw, who as Earl of Northumbria would
have prevented their supremacy over the north ; he had trusted them
then as patriots ; afterwards he had helped them in their distress when
Tostig and the Norwegian invader had appeared within the estuaries
and rivers of Mercia and Northumbria ; and now these showed them-
selves once again traitors. This is clear from the results, and results
are surer guides than the imaginary motives suggested by historians.
However well intentioned Harold may have been, however much he
may have been led by popular clamour, or instigated by those who were
to gain by it, the mistake was not the less fatal. At the first, as already
pointed out, it much accelerated William's progress on his landing, if
indeed it may not be said to have been the cause of his being able to effect
a landing at all ; and now, later on, the two earls seem to have looked on
either as cowards or as traitors, while Duke William was on his way to
be crowned King of England at Westminster Abbey. If he marched
thither direct from Sussex it was bad enough ; if there is truth in
the Berkhampstead story it was worse. One Chronicler2 represents
their fleeing to the north with the hopes of being able to save a part of
1 Prof. Freeman writes, Norman Conquest, vol. iv. (1871) p. 778 : 'The date
of the submission of Oxford to William is very doubtful. One would have been
inclined to place it in 1066, when William was so near as Wallingford, and the
influence of Wigod and his position as sheriff of the shire would also make an early
date likely.'
2 William of Malmesbury. See ante, p. 188.
O
L94 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
their more northern shires from Duke William's invasion, recking little
what became of the rest of their country. This is, however, hardly
consistent with what we next hear of them, for their names appear
amidst the court retinue visiting Normandy, mixing with the nobles, and
in all probability receiving honours and welcome from the Conqueror's
countrymen ; although they may have been prisoners in the eyes of the
shrewd King William, their choice must have had something to do with
their accompanying his train in the manner they did. The circum-
stance of their submission without striking a blow, and their acceptance
of the honours and hospitality offered them, are quite consistent with one
another, and afford still further evidences, if such were at all needed,
that the policy of entrusting the whole of the northern and middle
portion of the kingdom to the sons of iElfgar, which was adopted at
the Oxford Gemot of 1065, was the one great mistake which, more than
any other, led to the country being subjected to the Norman rule.
Taking the above circumstance into account — namely, that the Earl
of Mercia yielded himself to William in such a way as to suggest that
he hoped to be allowed to retain his honours and estate — there would be
no reason whatever for a siege of Oxford to take place at all. In fact, so
far as any argument may be adduced from the silence of the Chronicles,
it would appear that this part of the kingdom was absolutely paralysed.
After William was crowned, and when the work began of subduing
those parts of the country which rose in rebellion, we have no record
whatever that Oxfordshire was amongst those which withstood him.
Indeed, it may be said that all the details which we gather from the
various historians who record in one way or another William's cam-
paign, rather point to the submission of Oxfordshire and Berkshire
from the very first, at the same time as the other southern counties of
Kent, Surrey, Sussex, and Hampshire. Whether this arose from
Oxfordshire having been exhausted of its fighting men, like the others;
or whether from being joined to the kingdom of Wessex, as has already
been pointed out as possible, it yielded with the rest of that kingdom
when Harold was conquered ; or whether, as suggested from one con-
sideration, it was under the rule of Earl Gyrth, who had just been
slain in the great battle, fighting by the side of Harold ; or lastly,
whether, still being in the Mercian kingdom (and this from some
circumstances seems perhaps to be the most probable), it came beneath
the influence of Eadwine and Morkere — it may certainly be said
to have given no sign worthy of any mention of having offered
resistance to Duke William before his coronation, or to King William
afterwards.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 195
The siege of Oxford, however, finds a place not only in all the
histories of Oxford 1, but, even in historical works of such pretensions
as Thierry's Histoire de la Conquete de I'Angleterre, Lappenberg's
History, and in many other histories of England2.
In most cases it is implied that the siege took place at the end of
1067 or early in 1068. On William's return from Normandy3 it is
clear he had at once to hasten to Devonshire and Cornwall to quell the
rebellion which had broken out there, but there is no conceivable
reason for supposing that he took Oxford on his way. Soon after,
and while he was spending the Easter of 1068 at Winchester, he
heard that the North was in rebellion. He marched to York. We
have several details preserved of the campaign, and the total silence of
all the chronicles as to the siege of Oxford renders it highly improbable
that such took place.
On the other hand, the origin of the general acceptance of the
statement that Oxford was besieged is not far to seek. It is simply an
error, caused by a single transcriber, of Oxonia for Exonia, which has
been multiplied by successive transcribers ; and since it is so important
1 Antony Wood, whom most of the other historians of Oxford have copied, con-
cludes his paragraph on this year by, ' All that I shall add shall be this quaere,
whether William the Conqueror who is said by several (not ancient) authors
(particularly Rich. Grafton) to be so much offended with the Scholars of Oxford
that he withdrew their maintenance from them for a time, may not arise from their
opposition to him when he besieged it V Annals, ed. 1792, vol. i. p. 127.
2 Thierry, in his Histoire de la Conquite de V Angleterre par les Normands (3rd
ed., Paris, 1830, vol. ii. p. 65), has the following expansion of the reference to the
siege, ' La nouvelle de l'alliance formee entre les Saxons, et le Roi d'Ecosse et des
rassemblements hostiles qui se faisaient au nord de l'Angleterre determina Guil-
laume a ne pas attendre une attaque, et a prendre vivement l'offensive. Son
premier fait d'armes, dans cette nouvelle expedition, fut le siege de la ville d'Oxford.'
He then applies the notes which William of Malmesbury has given of the siege of
Exeter to the siege of Oxford, and adds, ' Sur sept cent maisons pres de quatre
cents furent detruites.' He then adds (and the combination affords a good illus-
tration of how, it is much to be feared, many of the older chroniclers on whom we
rely so much, compiled their histories), 'Les religieux du Couvent de Sainte Frides-
wide, suivant l'exemple des moines de Hida et de Winchecombe, prirent les armes
pour defendre leur monastere et en furent tous expulses apres la victoire des Nor-
mands.' The authority he gives for this is a line in the Chartulary of S. Frides-
wide's, quoted in Dugdale, i spoliati bonis suis et sedibus appulsi sunt,' but separated
absolutely from its context, as will be seen. See ante, p. 166, and Appendix A,
§ 61. It will be observed, however, that the event is definitely stated to have
happened before the Norman Conquest, and further that the monks, instead of
being driven out, were introduced in the place of the seculars. Lappenberg, in his
History of England, ed. 1837, v°l- "■ P- 82 (Geschichte der Europaischen Staaten,
vol. xiii.), keeps Oxford in his text, though he gives in his note reasons for
believing that it is written in error for Exeter.
3 King William's visit to his dominions in Normandy may be said to have ex-
tended from March to December, 1067.
0 2
196 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
an event, if it did happen, in the history of Oxford, it is thought well to
examine closely the authorities in regard to this part of the story.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D, which provides the basis on which
the later historians build up their narrative, runs as follows : —
' 1067. In this year the king came again to England on S. Nicholas'
mass-day (Dec. 6th) . . . And in this year the king set a heavy tax
on the poor people ; and nevertheless caused to be harried all that
they passed over. And then he went to Defenascire, and besieged the
town of Execeaster for eighteen days, and there many of his own
army perished, and he promised them well, and ill-performed ... At
this Easter (March 23rd) the king came to Winchester, . . . and
Archbishop Ealdred hallowed [Matilda] queen at Westminster on
Whitsunday (May nth). It was then announced to the king that the
people in the north had gathered themselves together and would stand
against him if he came. He then went to Nottingham, and there
wrought a castle ; and so went to York, and there wrought two castles,
and in Lincoln and everywhere in that part1.'
Florence of Worcester, writing before 11 18, summarized this, but
distinctly says : —
1 Then having gone with a hostile force into Devonshire (in Dom-
noniam), he besieged and quickly reduced Exeter (Execestram), which
the citizens and some English Thanes held against him2.'
He is followed verbatim by Simeon of Durham and Roger of
Hoveden. But William of Malmesbury makes his own paraphrase, head-
ing the chapter, ' Summary of the Battles of William of England' : —
* Of all the battles 3 then which he waged this is the summary. He
early subdued the city of Exeter (urbem Exoniam), which was in
rebellion, being supported by Divine aid, because, the outer portion
of the wall falling down, it gave an opening for him, and he attacked it
all the more fiercely as he declared that men so irreverent would be
deprived of God's favour He almost devastated York, the only
refuge left for the rebels, destroying its citizens by famine and by the
sword V
He affords no evidence of having any information of any kind other
than that contained in the Chronicle, and it may be assumed he has
gratuitously inserted an anecdote in reference to the impudence of
the defenders, by way of giving point to his remark. Next he describes
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D, sub anno. Chronicle E is so meagre for this year
(only a few lines) that it omits all about Exeter and the journey to York. Appendix
A, § 82.
2 Florence of Worcester Chronicon: sub anno. Eng. Hist. Soc. ed. 1849, vol.
ii. p. 1. Appendix A, § 83.
3 Perhaps ' military expeditions ' would be the better translation of bella here.
4 William of Malmesbury, Gcsta Rcgum. Eng. Hist. Soc. 1840, vol. ii. p. 421.
Appendix A, § 84.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 197
the siege of York, which took place the following year. It must be
here remarked that all the known MSS. of William of Malmesbury have
Exoniam distinctly ; yet when Savile printed his edition of William of
Malmesbury, he altered it to Oxoniam, and hence, only, it has been
supposed that there was MS. authority for the reading 1.
Passing over Henry of Huntingdon, who does not mention any
siege at all till that of York, we come to Orderic Vital, who gives
a much fuller account of the siege of Exeter, and, writing circum-
stantially, as if he had it from some good source2, he notes that Exeter
was the first to contend for freedom; and, from the context, there
cannot be a shadow of foundation for supposing that there is here in
the MS. any error for Oxford. His narrative of William's movements
is tolerably full, as he makes him then march into Cornwall, and
back to Winchester in time for Easter; then follows the account
of Eadwine and Morkere's rebellion in the north, and though several
places are mentioned, there is an absolute silence as to Oxford. Inci-
dentally, however, it is noted that William gave Warwick to Henry, son
of Roger de Beaumont (who was afterwards created Earl of Warwick),
and that he built at some time or other the castle there ; and that is
the nearest place to Oxford mentioned.
We now come to the most important MS. in the course of the
1 Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores post Bcdam (Preface signed 'Henricus Savile')
Francofurti, 1601, folio 102. 'Urbem Oxoniam rebellantem leviter subegit.'
There can, however, be no conceivable reason for assuming that Savile used a MS.
which no one else had ever seen. It is true he does not say what MS. he used, but
as there is no other important various reading, one must assume he used one of the
five or six known MSS., all of which have distinctly Exoniam, and altered it on
his own responsibility to make it coincide with certain MSS. of Matthew Paris.
Besides, it is very clear, from what precedes and what follows, that William of
Malmesbury is paraphrasing the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D, viz. ' he went to
Defenascire and besieged the town of Exeter.' And, further, it must be remembered
that Savile is the reputed author of the forged passage which Camden made use of
in order to enhance the antiquity and historical importance of Oxford. See ante,
p. 43 ; also the note, respecting his supposed interpolation of the passage about
Oxford in Ingulph's description of Crowland. However, from the fact that no MS.
earlier than the close of the sixteenth century is in existence, this gratuitous inter-
polation cannot be brought home to him.
2 Orderic Vital, book iv. cap. 4 ; Duchesne, Hist. Norm. Script, p. 510. Orderic
Vital was born at Atcham, near to Shrewsbury, in 1075. At five years of age he
went to Shrewsbury to school. At ten years old he went over to the monastery of
St. Evroult, in Normandy, where he lived the greater part of his life. He certainly
on one occasion, and probably on more than one during his sojourn there, visited
England. In 11 15 he tells us he spent some days at Crowland, in Lincolnshire;
but most likely it was on another occasion that he went to Worcester and the
neighbourhood of his birth. His father died in 11 10. All this shows that he
might well have conversed with those who had been present as young men at the
siege of Exeter in 1067, and hence his story may be relied upon.
198 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
evidence bearing on the subject of Oxford being besieged. This is
Roger of Wendover's chronicle. The passage as it appears in the
only MS. existing is as follows : —
' How King IV i Hi am besieged Exeter and took it.
1 At this time King William laid siege to the city of Exeter, which
was in rebellion against him Wherefore William being roused
to anger, with very little effort subdued the City. Thence marching
to York he almost destroyed the city V
He is evidently summarizing William of Malmesbury : this is shown
not only by his introducing the same anecdote which that writer had
done, but also by the general context.
All then, up to this point, is quite clear, and all the chronicles follow
on one after the other, naming the two places Exeter and York, and
those two only.
Roger of Wendover's chronicle formed the basis of what is known
as Matthew Paris' Chronica Mq/ora, and there is preserved in the
Library of Corpus College, Cambridge 2, a transcript of Roger of Wen-
dover's chronicle with additions throughout the early part down to
1235, and a continuation afterwards. The additions and the con-
tinuation, there is every reason to think, are in Matthew Paris' own
handwriting. But the transcriber, in copying Roger of Wendover,
had written Oxonia instead of Exonia, all the rest being accurately
followed. The error was not detected, and it was copied off, with
Matthew Paris' corrections, into the fine MS. preserved in the
Cottonian Library and the less important in the Harleian Collection 3.
And since the more complete copy by Matthew Paris of the St. Alban s
Chronicle became the basis of successive chronicles, the correct
reading in Roger of Wendover's original copy was entirely overlooked,
and the erroneous reading, which passed under Matthew Paris' autho-
rity, found its way into all the later chronicles which treat of this period \
1 Roger of Wendover, Chronica, sive Flores Historiarum, Eng. Hist. Soc, 1841,
vol. ii. p. 4. The MS. of this chronicle is preserved in the Bodleian Library (Douce,
MS. CCVII), and is a fine vellum copy, written in the thirteenth century. After
the year 1235 occur the words, Hue usque scripsit cronica dominus Rogerus de
Wendover. This does not prove it to be the original autograph, but if it is not
it is certainly a very early transcript. The other MS., which was in the Cottonian
Collection (Otho, B. V.), was burnt, and only fragments remain. Roger of Wendover
is found to have died 1236. Appendix, § 85.
2 The MS. is known as C. C. C. C. 26. The continuation of the same as
C. C. C. C. 16. Matt. Paris, Chronica Afajora, Rolls Series, ed. 1872, vol. i. p. 465.
3 The Cottonian MS. is marked Nero, D.V.; the Harleian MS. is numbered 1620.
It is noted however by Sir Frederick Madden (Matt. Paris, Historia Minor, Rolls
Series, 1866, vol. i. p. 10) that in the Cottonian MS. Exoniam is retained in the
rubric although Oxoniam has been followed in the text.
4 Matthew Paris, when compiling his Historia Anglorum (which, because it is
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 199
Having disposed of the only vestiges of evidence of any recorded
siege, it remains to say a word or two as to an unrecorded siege.
It is of course impossible to prove that such did not occur. But
a consideration of the circumstances renders it, a priori, highly im-
probable that Oxford was besieged by William at all. The coronation
of William at Westminster, although it virtually made him king over all
England, may not certainly have rendered him actually so. There
were the outlying districts, no doubt, which were in a state of rebellion,
and Devonshire and Cornwall seem to have found leaders to refuse
submission to the new king ; while Eadwine and Morkere, playing, as
they did, fast and loose with William, at one moment his guest in his
Normandy progress, and the next in open rebellion against him, seem
to have gathered together a force of some kind in Northumbria early
in 1068. But the Midland counties had no rulers; as already said,
Gyrth was slain, and Leofwine also, who might have done some
service in Kent and Essex. There was no one to lead a rebellion,
and for a solitary city to stand out would have been useless with the
prestige which William had gained by his energy and decision.
It has already been pointed out that no reason can be assigned for his
besieging Oxford on his way during his first campaign in Devonshire,
when Exeter was besieged, nor in that of the north, which followed
sometime after ; it may be added, that there is no reason which can
be adduced why, in his second campaign into Yorkshire, in 1070, he
should stop to besiege a city like Oxford ; nor indeed in any of the
campaigns previous to 107 1, when we find Robert D'Oilgi in quiet
possession of the city.
The erroneous reading of Oxford, however, has permeated, as has
been said, nearly all histories, and it is necessary here to refer to a
remarkable instance in which this erroneous reading is made to
support a theory, while the theory is supposed to prove the integrity
of the reading.
In the edition of the Domesday Survey, printed by order of the English
Government in 1816, the preface by Sir Henry Ellis has the following
an abridgment of the Chronica Majora which he had edited, is called for con-
venience Historia Minor), follows the reading of Oxonia, not having detected
the error of the scribe. Historia Anglorum, Rolls Series, 1866, p. 10. Amongst
the later editions, so to speak, of the St. Alban's Chronicle, that which was
completed at "Westminster, and which, because it incorporated Matthew Paris'
Chronicle, seems to have been attributed to an imaginary Matthew of Westminster,
has been very extensively used by the historians of the fifteenth century ; and as
that had the erroneous reading, it may be said literally to have found its way into
every English history which refers to the siege of a town at this time.
200 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
argument on the question of a large number of houses being returned
vastac ct destructac : —
* The extraordinary number of houses specified as desolated at
Oxford requires explanation. If the passage is correct, Matthew
Paris probably gives us the cause of it under the year 1067, when
William the Conqueror subdued Oxford on his way to York V
It may be asked reasonably, if this is not so, how is so unusual a
number of houses wasted and destroyed to be accounted for ? In the
first place it must be taken into account that the term vastae does not
necessarily mean destroyed, but simply empty, i.e. untenanted, and
therefore not liable to pay tax ; and houses in this state may have
made up a large proportion of the total number, 478. Many, too,
from being uninhabited, would be out of repair also. The word
des/ruc/ae, however, is also added by the compiler of the Survey, and
therefore we ought to look for some definite act of violence. We have
not to look far for this amongst recorded events. The rebel army,
headed by Eadwine and Morkere, marching southwards and obliging
the Gemot to be transferred from Northampton to Oxford on October
28th, 1065, as already described2, would account for a destruction
such as this. The few words of the Chronicle give an insight into
the nature of this so-called army, in reality a rebel mob. They had
slain all the household men of Earl Tostig — that is, all men in autho-
rity and probably all who had property — and had taken all his weapons
which were at York, besides all the treasure they could lay their hands
on. They had gathered as they went southward men of Nottingham-
shire, Derbyshire, and Lincolnshire, till they came to Northampton.
Here Eadwine met them with his men, and many Welshmen, we read,
came with him. It will be remembered also that the Chronicle of
this year adds that ' the Rythrenan] or the ' northern men/ ' did
great harm about Northampton, while Harold went on their errand,
1 General Introduction to the Domesday Survey, by Sir Henry Ellis : London,
1 816, folio, p. lxii. ; 8vo, 1833, i. p. 194. The suggestion that Matthew Paris implies
that it was on the way to York [in 1068] is distinctly erroneous, as has already been
pointed out. Exeter and York are described in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and by
the many historians who follow it, including William of Malmesbury, as two places
besieged distinctly at different times, the one before Easter, the other after Whitsun-
tide. As Matthew Paris' Chronicle is really only a transcript of that of Roger of
Wendover, which follows William of Malmesbury and has Exeter, it is unreason-
able to imply that he omitted all reference to the first campaign, and inserted
an account of a siege in the second, which no chronicler had previously ever
heard of. Thierry, as already shown, evidently follows the same lines — misled
probably by Sir Henry Ellis. In fact when once an error of the kind has been
made, all historians seem to follow it.
3 See ante, p. 181.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 201
inasmuch as they slew men, and burned houses and corn, and took
all the cattle V When to this is added, from the contemporary life
of Edward the Confessor, already noticed, that the mob came past
the middle of England as far as Oxford 2, which agrees with the cir-
cumstance mentioned in the Saxon Chronicle of the Gemot being
finally held at Oxford, there are ample means of accounting for the
devastation which took place there. The circumstance, too, of a
large number of houses being destroyed does not point so much to
the results of a siege in the case of Oxford, where the castle stood at
one extremity of the town, as it would in the case of a town where
the castle stood in the midst, and where the houses had grown up
round it. The earthwork of King Ethelred, which was, perhaps,
sufficient to withstand the irregular forces of the Danes, would not
have availed long against the well-drilled army and the well-armed
archers of the Duke of Normandy ; and when it was taken, though
the soldiers might, out of wanton mischief, have burned some few
houses, it would not have been at all in accordance with Duke
William's policy to have allowed them to destroy the town, and
therefore it is unreasonable to assume that it was done; espe-
cially, too, as this reason is not given in the Domesday Survey, which
it probably would have been, judging from other similar incidental
notes, had the siege been the cause of the destruction of houses.
But the rebel mob of the North, joined as they were by Welshmen, and
having cast off all restraint and discipline 3, would, on arriving at a
town, be readily prompted to any wanton mischief or atrocity, and be
quite capable of destroying two-thirds of the buildings ; and though it
had happened more than twenty years before the Survey, still, remem-
bering the unsettled state of the kingdom, it is no wonder that the
men of Oxford had not repaired the losses. Those who were driven
out from their homes could not well have returned while Eadwine was
still lord over the shire 4, for many who had houses in Oxford were
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicles D, E, sub anno 1065. See ante, p. 183.
2 The words describing their course are as follow : ' Nam conglomerati in infini-
tum numerum more turbinis seu tempestatis hostili expeditione perveniunt ad
Axoneuorde oppidum, satis scilicet pervagati ultra mediae Anglise terminum.' Lives
of Edward the Confessor, Rolls Series, 1858, p. 422.
1 ' Ejecto autem eo, ad vomitum reversi sunt veteris malitise, amissoque freno
discipline, furorem adoriuntur majoris insaniae.' Ibid. p. 422.
4 In the last chapter it was implied that there was much difficulty in assigning
the various counties to the various earldoms. In 105 1 it may be taken as certain
that both Oxfordshire and Berkshire were included within the earldom of Swegen.
(See Florence of Worcester, sub anno.) Whether or not for any reason Gyrth or
Leofwine had their territories extended, and either of them took in Oxfordshire,
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
sides P00 Possosse(l ^an(^ m tnc immediate neighbourhood ; for the
work of vcrc not Possessed only by the citizens who had no other
if so ther^111 'n» l^ie years io^7 t0 IOVr everything relating to the
are oroun ln*s l)art °f England was uncertain. Then Robert D'Oilgi
mound w~ g°vernor °f me town, and those who had left, even sup-
to thor "ae-v m'Snt navc rcturncd to their lands under new lords,
0f ^nt have not cared to return to their Oxford houses even if they
Dad the money to restore them, which is not at all probable. On the
question, however, of the waste mansions more will have to be said
in the next chapter under the account of the Domesday Survey of
Oxford.
The next great event is the new fortification of Oxford : of this we do
not find any notice in the historians on which chief reliance has been
hitherto placed. The series of Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, as has been
pointed out, are now reduced practically to the single record supposed
to have been compiled originally at Peterborough, but whether con-
tinued there after the Conquest is not ascertainable. Other chronicles
however, preserved and continued in different abbeys, in a measure
take their place, and, while giving a general summary of events culled
from the writings of whatever historian the chronicler happened to
possess, record here and there local events, either derived from actual
knowledge or deduced from charters or entries in registers found in
the archives of the abbey. Such, as regards Oxford, are the
Chronicles of Oseney and the Chronicle of Abingdon. Unfortunately,
no chronicle seems ever to have been kept at S. Frideswide's, or the
material for the history of Oxford might have been less scarce than it
is, nor yet at Ensham, the charters of which abbey, so far as they are
preserved, throw hardly any light upon this period.
It is to the first of these that we owe the mention of the building of
the Castle. The entry is very brief, as follows : —
'mlxxi. The same year was built (aedificatum est) the Castle of
Oxford, by Robert d'Oili the First V
may be doubtful. It seems certain, however, that the Northumbrian mob with
Eadwine at their head overran Oxfordshire in 1065, and annexed it practically to
the one great northern kingdom, Harold being driven below Thames, i. e. into the old
Wessex. The Northumbrian earls seem to have overrun Mercia just as the Wessex
king had overrun Mercia more than three hundred years previously {ante, p. 108).
1 Annates Monasterii dc Osencia. Printed in Annates Monastici, Rolls Series,
1869, vol. iv. p. 9. The MS. is in the Cottonian Collection, and marked Tiberius
A. 9. It is written in the same handwriting down to the year 1233, and then
continued by different hands ; but although this is the date of the MS., there is no
doubt but that, generally speaking, the events have been recorded at an earlier
date. In a MS. in Corpus Christi College, Oxford, the building of the castle is
put under the year 1072. ' Robertus de Oili straxit castellum Oxonii/ Dugdale,
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST.
The abbey in which these annals were kept was not founr1
1 1 29, but then the founder was Robert D'Oilgi, the nephe'
great Robert D'Oilgi, mentioned in the extract. It is natur
fore, that the deeds of the uncle should be recorded in thf
the abbey ; besides which, the documents which came
possession are found incidentally to have recited the building
Castle.
But the question which suggests itself here is the force of the word
1 built/ It does not necessarily exclude the fact of a castle existing
here before, because we know that there must have been such ; nor,
on the other hand, does it necessarily imply that he erected a castle
such as is usually conceived by the word, namely, a keep * with stone
walls and stone towers surrounding it : but there is a middle course
between the two which may reasonably be taken. We were not
indebted to him wholly for the Castle, nor did he make what he
found into such a castle, as we can picture, from the details and
descriptions which have come down to us, to have existed in the
twelfth or thirteenth centuries. The great mound was certainly there
already ; this is not of the character of the work of the Normans at
this period ; but no doubt he deepened the ditches, and perhaps on the
west slightly extended the enceinte, and added, possibly, new palisades,
if not walls. But the main work, which struck so much the annalist,
and prompted him to use the word ' built,' was the great tower, and
that built of stone, which is now existing, and which, situated upon the
line of enceinte, guarded the western approach to the Castle. The
means of attack had improved during the past hundred and fifty
years, and a lofty tower had great advantages over the mound as a
means of defence : it was less easily assailed, the defenders could
more safely reach the summit, and when there they had a much
better position against the assailants below than from the sloping
Mon. vol. vi. p. 251 ; and this agrees with a passage which occurs in the Oseney
Cartulary, from which, no doubt, it was derived.
1 It has been thought that Robert D'Oilgi might have erected something of the
nature of a stone keep on the top of the mound. If so, however, all traces of it,
even down to the foundation, would have been removed in Henry the Third's reign,
when the well-room was constructed at the top of the mound. There were a few
traces existing some years ago of what appeared to have been the foundation of a
tolerably large building, some fifty-eight feet in diameter, and in the form of
a decagon surrounding the hexagonal plan of the well-room, and probably of the
same date; they are laid down on the plan given in King's Vestiges of Oxford
Castle, London, 1796. The probabilities are that the builders of Robert D'Oilgi's
castle would not have ventured to erect one of the great solid structures common
in the eleventh and twelfth centuries on the top of an artificial mound of earth ;
they would have known that the foundations must soon have given way.
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
>f a mound. It is impossible to conceive that the two were the
'.he same age, or part of the same system of fortification ; and
re is no doubt the mound was the earlier. But just as there
Is, which have already been given *, for believing that this
is of the early part of the tenth century, from its similarity
.oe of Warwick, Tamworth, &c, which were part of one system
. fortification then adopted, so the masonry and such architectural
details as exist in the present tower leave little or no doubt but that
what we still see is the work of Robert D'Oilgi, referred to in the
Oseney Annals as having been completed in 1071.
The building of the Castle was necessitated now, not by fear of
foreign invasions, nor, indeed, of the attacks of one kingdom or
earldom by another, but by the danger of revolt. King William
knew full well that there was still an English spirit slumbering, and
that any day circumstances might arise or leaders be found by which
it might be awakened and cause him much trouble and expense to
suppress it. Numerous instances of the disturbed state of the country
may be found ; and William, besides requiring safe retreats for his
garrisons, required also prisons for those who were suspected of
treason2. His plan seems to have been to erect castles, and confide
them to friends or followers whom he could trust. Referring to what
was done in this district the Abingdon Chronicler writes : —
' Then castles were built for the preservation of the kingdom, at
Wallingford {Walingqforde), and at Oxford (Oxeneforde), and at Windsor
(Wildesore), and at other places V
These three were especially selected to guard the passage of the
Thames. We have no record of the exact date of the building of
Wallingford Castle 4, and it must be remembered that the Abingdon
1 See ante, p. 117.
2 The Abingdon Chronicler supplies one or two illustrations : e. g. he dilates
upon the unfortunate state of England, and first records the capture of Bishop
^Egelwin of Durham [Bp. 1056-71], who, having been found in arms, was sent as.
a prisoner to be kept at Abingdon Abbey : while on the other hand Ealdrcd, abbot
of Abingdon, who was suspected, was sent to be kept as a prisoner in Wallingford
Castle [1070-71] till he was handed over to the care of Walchelin, Bishop of Win-
chester [Bp. 1070-98], (vol. i. p. 486). Also, when Abbot Adelelm first came to
the abbey [c. 1071], he never went about unless accompanied by armed men (vol. ii.
P- 3).
3 Chron, Monast. dc Abingdon, Rolls Series, 1858, vol. ii. p. 3.
4 It may be safely assumed that the castle built by the Conqueror at Wallingford
was situated near the river at the northern extremity of the town, where there exists
an artificial mound of the same character as that at Oxford, Warwick, Tam-
worth, &c. ; this mound was probably erected at about the same time, and for
the same purpose, as the others, though the erection is not recorded, and the
remains are not sufficient to show what William added. In after years the
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 205
chronicler is rather summarizing events than recording them, since
there is no reason to suppose his Chronicle to be much earlier than the
two MS. transcripts we possess of it, namely, of the thirteenth century.
As regards Windsor, too, it is not at all clear when the Conqueror
commenced erecting the castle, upon the lofty outlier of chalk which,
surmounted as it is by the modernized medieval buildings, forms so
conspicuous an object in this part of the Thames valley. Henry of
Huntingdon records that the first time the king's court was held on this
hill was by Henry I. in n 10, implying that Henry and not William
erected the same, and that all events previously chronicled as taking
place at Windsor were at Old Windsor in the parish of Clewer *.
It is singular, perhaps, that neither Orderic Vital, nor yet other his-
torians of the twelfth century make any mention of the erection of a
castle at Oxford, though they record the building of castles at several
other places ; so that were it not for the local information derived
medieval castle which took the place of William's work played an important part
at several periods of our history, notably in King Stephen's reign, in King John's
reign, and in that of Edward II. It was of considerable extent ; Leland, describing
it in Henry the Eighth's time, writes : ' The castelle yoinith to the North Gate of
the Toune, and hath 3 Dikis, large and deap, and welle waterid. About ech of
the 2 first Dikis as apon the crestes of the creastes of the Ground cast out of rennith
an embatelid Waulle now fore yn ruine, and for the most part defaced. Al the
goodly Building with the Tourres and Dungeon 3 be within the 3 Dike.' Leland's
Itinerary, Hearne's ed. vol. ii. p. 13. Camden, writing in Elizabeth's reign, also
describes it : ' Its size and magnificence used to strike me with astonishment, when
I came thither a lad from Oxford, it being a retreat for the students of Christ Church.
It is environed with a double wall and a double ditch, and in the middle on a high
artificial hill stands the citadel, in the ascent to which by steps I have seen a well
of immense depth.' (Camden's Britannia, Gough's ed., 1789, vol. i. p. 148.) The
castle again played a part in the history of the civil war in the time of Charles I,
and eventually, by an order in Council dated November 18, 1652, it was demolished ;
some of the ditches, however, are in places to be traced, here and there portions of
the old masonry crop up above the soil, and the mound still remains. The grounds
are now laid out as a private garden attached to the house belonging to Mr. Hedges
of Wallingford, who has written an account of the castle ( The History of Wallingford>
by John Kirby Hedges, J. P. 2 vols. London, 1881). Mr. Hedges (p. 196) thinks
the language employed in the Survey respecting the eight hagae being destroyed,
' implies that a new castle was built and not in substitution of one existing ' ; but
surely the case is similar to that at Oxford. See p. 203. The castle is mentioned in
the Domesday Survey (fol. 56 a), only in consequence of eight out of fourteen hagae
having been destroyed to make room for its extension. As to the general fortifi-
cation of the whole town, so Roman-like in the plan, and of which the vallum
remains so perfect at the south-western extremity, there are many difficulties in
assigning to it a date.
1 See Proceedings of Oxford Arch, and Historical Society, New Series, Nov. 1881,
vol. iv. p. 30. In the Domesday Survey, under Clewer, there is the entry of five
hydes, of which four and a half hydes pay tax, the castle being in the remaining half
hyde. This of course refers to the old castle. The new one on the hill above
Windsor is not mentioned in Domesday at all.
2o6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
from the Oseney Cronicle and Chartulary, confirmed as it is by the
Abingdon Chronicle, we should have been left in ignorance as to the
time when Oxford Castle was erected.
It will also be observed that it is not mentioned in Domesday,
though the mansions set apart for the repair of the wall are alluded
to ; the reason, however, of this is probably that here there was
little or no encroachment on the town, as was the case with
Wallingford, Lincoln, and some other towns where the castle is men-
tioned In consequence of houses being destroyed; here it would seem
that the new castle followed the line of the existing entrenchments ; if
not those of the time of Edward the Elder, when the castle enceinte
was first set out, at least, those more extended, perhaps, of the time of
Edward the Confessor. Of course being royal property and kept in
the king's hands, the castles would not of themselves be entered in the
Survey, since they were not liable to pay any tax to the crown.
It was perhaps due to the piety of Robert D'Oilgi that a chapel with
a provision for attendant priests or canons was founded in the Castle
some two or three years after he had erected the tower.
In the Oseney Annals, already referred to, we find under the year
1074, the following : —
1 mlxxiv. The Church of S. George was founded in Oxford Castle
{in Castillo Oxenfordensi) by Robert d'Oilithe First and Roger de IvryV
It should be mentioned here that there are two Chronicles of
Oseney, one of which may be said generally to be a copy of the other,
though in parts different. The second one was the work of a certain
Thomas Wykes, an inmate of the abbey, but as far as this passage is
concerned, it is simply an abridgment by Wykes of the original of the
Abbey Chronicle.
' mlxxiv. The Church of S. George was founded in the Castle of
Oxford {in Castro Oxoniae) V
But we have, besides the Annals of Oseney, another source of in-
formation, namely copies of charters in the Oseney Cartulary.
Since the property was afterwards granted to Oseney, the com-
piler of the Oseney Cartulary, having the original charters before
him, drew up a summary of the facts to be gleaned from them,
and prefixed it to the copies of the charters which he transcribed.
1 Annalcs Monastici, Rolls Series, vol. iv. p. 10.
2 Printed in Annates Monastici, Rolls Series, 1869, vol. iv. p. 10, from the Wykes'
Chronicle (Coltonian MS. Titus A. 14.) Wykes probably began compiling his
Chronicle about 1270, making use of the copy of the Oseney Annals, which we
possess only in part.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 207
Unfortunately this Cartulary, as before explained1, suffered much in
the fire of 1731. We are therefore dependant principally upon tran-
scripts made before the fire. It so happens that of the greater part of
the Cartulary, or of one very similar to it, an English version was
made some time before the Dissolution, and this has been preserved
in the Public Record Office. Judging from the handwriting, this
version was made in Henry the Sixth's or Henry the Seventh's reign,
and the translation, so far as opportunity has been afforded of com-
parison, is found to be very close to the original. The general
history of the foundation runs as follows : —
Of the Fundation of the Chapell of Seynte George.
It is to be myndyd that Robert Doyly and Roger of Ivory, sworne
brethren and iconfederyd or ibownde everich to other by feythe and sac-
rament come to the conquest of Inglonde with Kyng William bastarde.
This Kyng gafe to the said Robte Iveyrie baronyes of Doylybys
and of Saynte Walerye.
In the yere fro the Incarnation of our Lorde A. M.lxxij, was
ibelde the castell of Oxonforde in the tyme of Kyng William aforsaide.
This Robt. Doylly gafe to his sworn brother Roger aforsaide a baronye
the which is nowe icallid of Seynte Walerye.
In the yere off our Lorde a. M.thre score and xiiij [1074] was
ifounded the church of Saynte George in the castell of Oxonforde of
Robt Doylly the firste, and of Roger of Ivory, in the tyme of Kyng
William bastarde, the which sett in the seyde church seculer chanons,
and certeyne rentes of the tweyne baronyes afore saide to the seyde
chanons asseyned of churchis, londis, tithis, and possessions, and other
thyngs.
Then follows the charter of Robert D'Oilgy. It is probably called
rightly that of the first Robert, but since he died early in William
Rufus's reign the reference to King Henry must be an interpolation
from a confirmation charter.
A Charter of Robert Doylly the First of the Fundacion of the Church of
Seynte George, igefe to the Seculere Chanons ; the which undurfolcvueth.
Be hit iknowe to the feythfull men of holy Church both present and
to be tht I Robert Doylly, willyng and grauntyng Aldithe my wiffe
and my brethren Nigelle and Gilberte, gafe and graunted and with this
presente charter confirmed into pure and perpetualle almes to God,
and to the church of Seynte George in the castell of Oxonforde ; and
to the chanons in hit servyng God, and to ther successoures, the
church, the which for the helth of Kyng Henry and the welfare of all
the reame ; Also and for myne helth and of my wiffe, and brethen,
fadurs and modurs, and of our frendes, all thyngs, tenements, tithis, and
possessions undurwrite ; that is to say, the church of Seynte Marye
Mawdelyn, the which is isett in the subbarbis of Oxonforde, with thre
1 See ante, p. 9.
208 HIE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
hides of londe in Walton, and medys and tithis to the same church
perteyning, as hit is conteyned withinne, ' How the Church of Seynte
George come, &c.' *
Since the name of Roger of Ivry was so closely connected with
the gift, it seems necessary, in order to complete the account,
that the copy of his grant should be also given. It is much in
the same terms as the previous charter, but there are slight vari-
ations, and these raise questions as to how far the lands in Walton
granted by him are the same as those granted by Robert D'Oilgi,
and consequently what was the nature of that curious partnership
which seems to have existed between Robert D'Oilgi and Roger
of Ivry, which the author of the English version has translated
'sworne brethren iconfederyd and ibownde everich to other' {fratres
jurati, et per fidem, et sacramentum confederaii). It runs as follows: —
A Confirmation of Roger of Ivory e of ye gifte of ye saide Robert.
Knowe they that be present and to be that I Roger of Ivorye for
the helth of our lorde Kynge and of all the reame and also for the helth
of my lorde Robert Doylly and Aldithe his wiffe and the helth of myne,
have I graunted and with my present charter confermed to God, and
to the church of Seynte George the which is isett in the castle of
Oxonforde all landes and tenements, tithis, rentis, and possessions, the
which the saide Robert D'oylly of his baronyis gafe and graunted, and
assyned to God and to the church of Seynte George afore saide and to
the chanons there servyng God, that is to say the church of Seynte
Marye Mawdeleyne, the which is isett in the subarbis of Oxonforde
and with thre hides in Walton and ye londe of twenty acre, &c. as
they been conteyned withinne in the title * Howe the church was
igefe of seynte george to the chanons of Oseneye, &c.'
Then follow two charters directly connected with the foundation,
and the lands therein named duly appear later on as amongst the
gifts confirmed by Robert D'Oilgi's nephew, Robert D'Oilgi the
younger. The first is by a Thomas Deen (called in the confirmation
charter Thomas le Den) of his croft called ' Deny's Croft,1 and else-
where 'Denes Croft] described as in the suburbs of Oxford. The
second is a charter by a certain Brunman of Walton, * granting all
his londe with medys and other pertinences' the which he held of
1 From an English version of the Cartulary of Oseney, written partly on paper,
partly on parchment, preserved in the Public Record Office, Miscellaneous Books,
vol. xxvi. Oseney, fol. i. Copies of the original charters, &c, here given, so far as
they can be obtained, will be printed in the Appendix, but it would seem the leaves
on which they were written in the Cottonian MS., and which probably came at
the commencement of the volume, are irretrievably lost. The words with which
the charter ends refer to the title of a charter summary given later on folio 5.
Appendix A, § 86.
- Ibid. fol. 1. Appendix A. § 87.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 209
Robert D'Oilgi in ' Walton and Twenty acre.' These fields to the
north of Oxford cannot be perhaps identified \ but we find Roger
of Ivry in the Domesday Survey holding the manor of Walton.
The chief point of interest is the naming of S. Mary Magdalen
Church in connection with the grant. It was the usual practice that
an open space should be left outside the chief gates of a town ; for many
reasons such an arrangement was found to be convenient. Further,
too, in the suburbs of towns, outside the gates, just as is still seen in
towns in France, which have kept up longer mediaeval customs than
in this country, houses are erected outside the line of the ' Octroi,'
which in many cases is identical with the line of the old fortification.
Whether then for strangers who, from one cause or another, could not
at once enter the city, or to supply the wants of the group of houses
which had sprung up there, a church had been provided.
Such churches were more frequently dedicated to S. Giles, whence
this saint had come to be considered the patron of beggars ; but in this
case the church just without the North gate was dedicated for some
reason to S. Mary Magdalen, and it was not till long after that the
houses had stretched sufficiently far along the Northern road to
warrant another church, which was then dedicated to S. Giles.
No record exists telling us distinctly that the church was of
Robert D'Oilgi's foundation; but taking into account the circum-
stances attending the history of the town, it is most probable that
such a church was not erected till Robert D'Oilgi assumed the
governorship and when there was some chance of peace and of pros-
perity returning to the town, and when it was his duty, in carrying
out the policy of his king, to further all such improvements.
There is nothing to show of what character the church was, but
there is every reason to believe it occupied the identical spot which
the church of S. Mary Magdalen now occupies. The peculiarity of
the position will be observed, namely, that it is, and always has been,
in the middle of the open space above referred to ; and, since a portion
of the road passed along both the eastern and western end of the
church, the only means of extension has been on the north and south,
so that the breadth of the church is as great as its length. No trace of
1 In a later charter temp. Henry I. the description runs as follows : — ' Ecclesiam
S. Mariae Magdalenae quae est in vico extra portam de Nort, et terram ex utraque
parte viae per quam itur de Waltona ad castellum ' (Dug. vi. 253). Taking the
charters as a whole the evidence points to the land in Walton not being directly
given to S. George's, but having been given to S. Mary Magdalen by the under-
tenants Dene and Brunman with the consent of their Lord, Robert D'Oilgi ; and
when the church was given to S. George's of course the land went with it.
2IO THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
any early work now remains ; judging from views some fifty years ago
there was a Norman chancel arch, apparently of King Stephen's or
Henry the Second's reign, and a doorway of still earlier date in the
wall of the northern aisle ; but all was done away with in the great rage
for church restoration which marked the early years of the reign of
Queen Victoria and with it any vestiges that might have existed of
the early work l.
And as to S. George's Church, when it is asked what remains,
the answer must be an unsatisfactory one. The tall Tower in this
case seems wholly to have served for the fortification. Unlike
S. Michael's, with its tower windows and their midwall shafts, it
does not seem to have been intended to hold church bells. While the
arch openings, at the top, and practically in the parapet itself, seem
to have been intended for access to the wooden galleries, which in
times of danger were customarily erected round the outside of towers
or any other structures intended for defensive purposes, and which
bore the name of hourdes 2. The lower chamber of the great tower
was approached from an eastern archway. The first floor chamber
and all above were approached by the doorway, some twelve feet or
more from the ground, to which access was obtained probably from the
level of the vallum or wall.
Of the church itself, the crypt, together with a portion of the walls
of the chambers which had been erected between the church and the
great Tower, were remaining perfect up to the year 1805. In con-
sequence of plans having been drawn for the erection of prison
buildings, in utter disregard of these ancient relics, everything was swept
away, and the new work to be erected on the site of the chapel requir-
ing deep foundations, even the masonry of the original crypt was dug
out. The stones, however, were preserved and re-erected near their
original site, and on the same plan; according to Mr. King each
pillar being set within eighteen inches of the original position ; but
the result is, that the remains are deprived of all historical value.
Before they were disturbed a plan seems to have been made, and is
engraved, with apparent pretensions to accuracy, in the Vestiges of
1 During recent restorations in the nave no trace of any ancient crypt was found.
The only signs of a crypt are in the south aisle, but so far as can be seen all
traces of original work, if any existed, were entirely effaced in the fourteenth
century when the south aisle was built.
a The best summary perhaps of the use of the Hourdes and their variety, and
the traces which exist in the stonework by which their previous existence can be
determined, will be found in Viollet le Due's Architecture of the Middle Ages,
English edition, Oxford, 1S60. See index to same under ' Hourde.'
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 211
Oxford C as lie l. Unfortunately, the descriptive letterpress is of a most
unsatisfactory character, Mr. King being incompetent to deal with
the architectural details, and his view that the church adjoined the
tower, while the crypt was some distance off, is of course unten-
able. The plan shows that some forty feet or more existed between
the western end of the crypt and the Castle tower, and though the
church probably extended westward somewhat beyond the back of the
crypt, it is highly improbable that it extended the whole distance,
while the angle of the walls adjoining the tower shows that they were
additions of much later design. A view engraved at a somewhat
earlier date 2 than Mr. King's plan, shows a little apsidal chapel standing,
absolutely separated from the tower, and apparently over the very
spot which, according to that plan, was occupied by the crypt.
The crypt as it existed before its destruction was about twenty-five
feet across in the interior and a little more from east to west, measur-
ing from the far extremity of the apse. The general character of the
work which remains is that of Henry the First's reign ; but taking into
account the history, there is much reason to suppose it to be the
original work of Robert D'Oilgi. The foundation of Oseney Abbey
took place in 11 29, though the church and college were not incor-
porated with it until Stephen's reign, i.e. in 1149 ; but there is little
reason for supposing that at either of those dates the Oseney com-
munity would have rebuilt a church in that position : the consideration
of the later history of S. George's Church however belongs to the next
century3.
1 Vestiges of Oxford Castle, by Edward King, fol. 1795. The book contains
some interesting views and details, and a conjectural plan of the general line of the
Castle ditch and the bridges across it.
2 An engraving of Oxford Castle, dated March 1785, given in Grose's Antiquities
of England and Wales, vol. iv. p. 182. At the same time both this view and that
given by Hearne in his edition of Guilielmi Neubrigensis Historia, 1719, and
engraved by Berghers, which also represents a similar apsidal chapel, may be open
to question as to accuracy. Mr. King says the little chapel above the crypt was
erected in comparatively modern times; this statement however, is .based possibly
on the fact that it is not shown in Loggan's view, or in that of Agas; still this
circumstance is of little force compared with the improbability of an apsidal chapel
being erected there in the eighteenth century absolutely de novo.
3 The charter, containing a confirmation of the grants, and further grants made
by Robert D'Oilgi the younger, nephew of Robert the elder, is given by>Dugdale,
vol. viii. p. 1462, as from a copy preserved in the Treasury of S. John's College.
The date, from the signatures, must be after 11 19, about which time the nephew
succeeded to his uncles property. Also charters appear in the Oseney Register
above referred to, confirming the gift, one of which is printed by Dugdale, vol. vi.
p. 251. And the confirmation charter of Henry I. is found in an 'Inspeximus ' in
the Charter Rolls, 13 Edw. II. No. 10, and printed in Dugdale (Ibid. p. 253).
In 1147 there was a lawsuit terminated respecting a claim which S. Frideswide's
P %
212 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
In the Abingdon Abbey Chronicle, to which reference has already
been made, we find Robert D'Oilgi several times mentioned, and, as
what is there told bears upon the work which he did towards the
strengthening and improvement of Oxford, a few words of extract will
not be out of place. It seems that at first he bore a bad character in the
eyes of the annalist, but afterwards a good one. Here is an extract : —
1 In his time (i.e. of Abbot Ethelhelm1) and in the time of the two
kings, that is to say of William who had conquered the English, and
of his son William, there was a certain ' Constabularius 2 ' of Oxford
called Robert ■ de Oili,' in whose charge at that time was placed that
district, both as regards the orders to be given, and the acts done, as
if they were ordered by the king himself. Now he was very wealthy,
and spared neither rich nor poor in exacting money from them, to in-
crease his own treasure. As is said of such in the short verse, —
As grows of wealth the store, so grows desire for more.
Everywhere he molested the churches, in his desire for gaining money,
chiefly the Abbey of Abingdon, such as taking away their possessions
and continually annoying them with law-suits, and sometimes putting
them at the King's mercy. Amongst other wicked things he took
away from the Monastery, by the King's consent, a certain meadow
situated outside the Walls of Oxford, and appropriated it for the use of
the soldiers of the Castle. At which loss the Abingdon brotherhood
were very sad, more than for any other ills. Then they all came to-
gether before S. Mary's altar, which had been dedicated by S. Dunstan
the Archbishop, and S. Athelwald Bishop, and while prostrating them-
selves before it prayed heaven to avenge them on Robert de Oili, the
plunderer of the Monastery, or to lead him to make satisfaction.
Meanwhile, whilst they were supplicating the Blessed Virgin day and
night, Robert fell into a grievous sickness, under which he, being im-
penitent, suffered for many days V
In the passage quoted it will be observed that reference is made to
a certain meadow outside the walls of Oxford. This no doubt is the
monastery had laid to S. Mary Magdalen church ; it was then adjudged to belong
to S. George in the Castle. {Oscney Chron. A>inales A/on., Rolls Series, iv. p. 25.)
This shows the activity of S. Frideswide in the twelfth century, in contrast to the
lethargy which, so far as we can judge, was exhibited in the eleventh. Although
several of the later charters and documents connected with Oseney refer back to and
throw light upon this early foundation of S. George in the Castle, and accompanying
grants, it is thought well to reserve them to some future occasion, when they can be
taken in connection with other documents of the twelfth century.
1 He was appointed abbot in 1071, and held his position till the time of his
sudden death in 1084 {Chron. A/on. Ab. ii. p. 284). His name is spelt Ethellel-
mus and Adelelmus. He came from Jumieges (Ibid. p. 283).
2 He is first mentioned as praedives Castclli urbis Oxcncfordcnsis Oppidanus,
(Ibid. vol. ii. p. 7).
3 Chron. A/onast. de Abingdon, Rolls Series, vol. ii. p. 12. Appendix A,
§88.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. i\$
meadow bearing the name of ' King's Mead ' to the present day l. The
chronicler puts the circumstance in a somewhat matter-of-fact way, but
the probabilities are that it was a question of law ; and though, as has
already been pointed out, the land under the jurisdiction of Abingdon
Abbey, and paying tithes to it, included Hincksey, and came up to
the borders of Oxford, there was probably much question as to the
boundaries. Oxford, and all on the Oxford side of the Thames,
was held by iElfgar, and what was held by iElfgar was so held by
King William, or his representative whom he had placed here ;
but the question would arise as to which of the many streams
represented the Thames. It is very possible that Abingdon Abbey
had gradually encroached upon the Oxfordshire side of the river2,
by obtaining grants of tithes from the occupants of the Hincksey
and Botley meadows for perhaps two or three generations, which
would, with a favourable court, give them prima facie jurisdiction.
Robert D'Oilgi, however, was no doubt jealous of his master's
rights as well as his own, and would not allow a single acre to go
undisputed ; moreover, the courts would now be less likely to
be favourable, and the monks of Abingdon probably lost their suit ;
but the chronicler would look upon Robert D'Oilgi as the despoiler of
the abbey property 3.
While he was ill, according to the chronicler, he dreamt a dream ;
he saw a Lady sitting on a throne, and was accused by her of
robbing the monastery of the meadow, into which he was ordered to
be led ; here very naughty boys brought hay and lighted it and nearly
suffocated him and set fire to his beard ; so that he cried out in his
agony, ' Sancta Maria ! have mercy on me, or I shall die.' His wife,
who was lying near him, woke him, and on his narrating to her his
1 King's Mead is marked on some maps as lying to the west of Great
Sconce Mead, and to the south of Oseney mead. It possibly had its name from
the circumstance that it was adjudged at this time to belong to the king. Amongst
the bad deeds of Abbot Ethelelm, above referred to, the compiler of the treatise
De Abbatibus Abbendonia records that he sent to Normandy for his relations,
and conferred on them property belonging to the Church, amongst which was
' pratum juxta Oxoniam ' (Chron. Mon. Ab. ii. p. 284). The meadow has however
an after-history as regards Abingdon, but it belongs to the next century.
2 The case of Bere Meadow, between two streams of the Thames, a little to the
south of Oxford, already referred to {ante, p. 169), was probably similar in character ;
the chief point in the contention on that occasion being the boundary of the county
which determined the jurisdiction of the Abbey at this point.
3 It is very probable that the determination of the shire boundary took place at
this time and that the westermost of all the streams was made the shire ditch, so
that all the meadows between the shire ditch on the west and the Castle Mill
stream on the east were adjudged to be on the Oxfordshire side and to belong to
the crown.
214 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
dream, she urged him to go to Abingdon and restore the meadow.
To Abingdon, therefore, the chronicler says, he caused his men to row
him (ad Abbendoniam turn navigare fecit\ and there before the altar he
made satisfaction. It is only an incidental note introduced, but it is
valuable as an illustration of the custom so generally prevalent of using
the rivers for locomotion rather than the roads. Many circumstances
point to this frequent use, and, amongst others, the references in the
Abingdon Chronicle to the revenue which the monks obtained from
tolls taken on the river \
At the same time, the frequent use of the river way must not be
taken to exclude the existence of roads. It has already been pointed
out that there was a ford across the main stream of the River Thames,
and probably a causeway across the meadows leading from the south
gate of Oxford, by which means Abingdon could be reached, follow-
ing the right bank of the river, through Kennington, and beneath
Bagley ". But there was probably also in these times something of
a causeway across the meadows, and fords across the streams leading
out towards the west of Oxford beyond the Castle. The road no
doubt passed by Botley, where there was a mill, in the same place as
there is now 3, as is proved by the double streams, and from Botley the
old road no doubt passed over the hill in a line to the south of the
present road (which dates only from the present century), close beneath
1 In the time of Abbot Ordric (c. 1060) the more direct stream of the Thames,
either by negligence or of set purpose, was allowed to become blocked up. The
loop which winds round to the west of the large meadow was kept clear, and the
consequence was that the Oxford boatmen, nam illorum navigium saepius transi-
tum illic habebat, in order to avoid the delay and toil of getting through the weeds
and mud, and when the water was low to prevent direct stoppage, agreed to pay
one hundred herrings per boat by way of toll {Chron. %Mon. Ab. vol. i. p. 481). In
the year 1 1 1 1 the right to this toll was disputed, but it was settled in favour of
the abbey; Ibid. vol. ii. p. 1 19.
2 See ante, p. 121. There is some reason for supposing that by this time a bridge
of some kind may have been erected across the main stream. See post cap. xi
in reference to the Bridges.
3 There was a law-suit with the men of ' Seacourt ' (or Seckworth as it is some-
times written, see ante, p. 69), about this mill in 1089. The chronicler introduces
it curiously by saying that it happened the year that Rochester was besieged by
Odo, Bishop of Bayeux. It would appear that the men of ' Sevecurda ' unlawfully
'broke the water course which they commonly call lacche'' (whence no doubt our
word lasher, e.g. lacher). It was settled by \os. being paid to the Abbot of Abing-
don, and two ora to be paid each year to the miller. It is an early instance of
suits respecting the right of keeping up water for mills, etc. , though possibly the water
was causing damage to the houses and gardens of Seacourt, which bordered on
what is known as the Shire ditch ; the occupants must have let the water flow off
into the ditches and meadows lying on the north of the Seven-bridge road.
Chron. Mon. Ab. vol. ii. p. 17.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 215
Chorley Hurst \ Thence access would be afforded to Bayworth or
Wootton 2, and so render Abingdon more accessible, perhaps, by this
route from the Castle at the extreme western end of Oxford than by
the southern road.
The policy of the Conqueror was to support the Church, and though
there was a roughness about the way in which he did so, and perhaps
not much real piety, no doubt many of his followers were religious men
and gave of their substance out of real religious motives to the provision
and support of churches, and of monasteries to supply the churches
with clergy. The annalist in the Abingdon Chronicle, after recount-
ing that on his arrival at Abingdon, whither he went in consequence
of his dream, he made satisfaction before the altar, and gave, besides
certain rents, one hundred pounds towards the rebuilding of the
monastery, proceeds : —
'But not only did he do so much towards the building of the
Church of S. Mary at Abingdon, but he also repaired at his own cost
other Parish Churches which were in a ruinous state (alias par ochianas
ecclesias dirutas) that is to say, both within the walls of Oxford and
without.
' For, whereas before his dream he was the plunderer of Churches,
and of the poor, so afterwards he became the restorer of Churches,
and a benefactor to the poor, and the doer of many good deeds.
Amongst other things the great bridge on the northern side (ad septen-
trionalem plagam3) of Oxford was built by him. He died in the
month of September 4, and was honourably buried within the presby-
tery 5 at Abingdon, on the north side. The body of his wife lies buried
on his left side V
In respect of Robert D'Oilgi being a builder of churches, it has
already been noticed that he built S. George's within the Castle, and
S. Mary Magdalen without the North-gate, and it will be shown later
on, in dealing with certain entries in the Domesday Survey, that
he probably also built S. Michael's Church at the North-gate of
1 The old line of road to within the last few years was very easily traceable, though
for some distance enclosed. In walking along it, it was difficult to realize that it
was at the beginning of the century the main coach road to the west from Oxford,
just as it is difficult to realize that the narrow and steep road over Shotover Hill
was once the main coach road to the east from Oxford.
2 These places, since they gave their names to the manors, were probably less
isolated from the roads of the district than they are now.
3 The word plaga is perhaps used from the circumstance that Oxford on its
three sides was surrounded by water, which was its chief protection.
4 The year is not given, but it must have been about 1090.
5 In Capitulo Abendonensi : this is commonly translated Chapter House ; but
it is more probably meant for in capitio, i.e. the caput ecclesiae, or the place
where the Altar stands, and it is therefore here so translated.
6 Chron. Mon. Ab. vol. ii. p. 14. Appendix A, § 89.
2l6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Oxford, and S. Peter's Church some little way within the East-gate.
Before the advent of Robert D'Oilgi, there is the definite record only
of the existence of one parish church in Oxford, namely, S. Martin's,
belonging to Abingdon, and therefore it is not certain what is meant
by repairing at his own cost 'parish churches which were in a ruinous
State, both within and without the town ' : still the Domesday book
shows that at the time the Survey was taken, besides S. Michael's
and S. Peter's, S. Mary's Church was in existence, and also a church
belonging to Ensham (i.e. S. Ebbe's). These two latter may possibly
have been built in Eadward the Confessor's time, and so, with
S. Martin's, suffered, when the mob from the north devastated Oxford ;
or, after all, it may perhaps only be a loose way of writing to enhance
the merits of the converted robber of the land which had belonged
to the abbey, and which now he had restored.
While detailing the benefits apparently accruing to the ecclesias-
tical status of Oxford from the appointment of Robert D'Oilgi, it must
be added in passing, that the seat of the Bishop of the diocese, which
had hitherto been at Dorchester, and therefore in the neighbourhood
of Oxford, was now removed to Lincoln. It is not easy altogether to
assign the motives of the change. Personally, Remigius, with his
Norman notions, may not have cared for the low-lying district on the
north bank of the Thames, and he could not well, perhaps, have
built his palace and cathedral on Sinodun Hill, on the bank opposite,
since this was in the diocese of Salisbury. But more probably his
position of Bishop was looked upon from a political point of view ;
and so the city of Lincoln, which had been an important centre of the
old Dane law, and which was in the midst of a district still rebel in its
disposition, would be an important post, as much for a Bishop's palace
as for a castle. Remigius was evidently much trusted by the Con-
queror, and his presence in the north would be a great safeguard to
begin with, and his power would be all the greater if he could wield
the ecclesiastical arm as well as the civil1. The date of the translation
need not create the difficulty which it is supposed to do from various
1 There is probably but very little reason for the scandal that Remigius bought
the bishoprick, or, as William of Malmesbury {Gesta Pontifiaim, Rolls Series,
p. 312) puts the matter, that he came to England to help William on the condition
that, if successful, the Duke should reward him with a bishoprick ; no doubt the
monk of Fecamp was warm in the Duke's cause, and his name appears in the
somewhat doubtful list of gifts to Duke William, as the donor of one ship. {Dc
navibus per Magnates Norma)iniae provisis pro passagio. MS. Bodl. e Mus. 93.)
It is, however, probable that William promoted him, quite as much with a view
to the services which he anticipated that his new position would enable Remigius
to render in future, as with that of recompensing him for his services in the past.
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. z\J
historians assigning different dates. Such a matter is not done in a
day ; there are various stages, and historians date from one or other
of these stages according to their judgment. The earliest document
is a charter of William the Conqueror, beginning as follows :
1 William, King of the English to T. l sheriff, and all the sheriffs of
the episcopate of Bishop Remigius, greeting, know that I have trans-
lated the see of the Bishopric of Dorchester to the city of Lincoln, by
the authority and with the counsel of Pope Alexander [i. e. Alexander
II. 1061-1073] and of his legates; also of Archbishop L[anfranc], and
of other Bishops of my kingdom ; and that I have given sufficient land
there, free and quit of all customary payments, for building therein a
mother church of the whole diocese, with residences, etc., adjoining2.'
Remigius had succeeded to Dorchester in 1067, but it was not
till after 1070 3, at least, that the removal was set about. It perhaps
could scarcely be said to be completed till the consecration of the new
Cathedral, which took place a few days after the death of Remigius,
in May 1092. It has not been observed that Remigius signed any
charters as Bishop of Lincoln, but the Domesday Survey recognises
Lincoln as the seat of the bishopric, and not Dorchester 4. The
translation of the see, however, would perhaps have affected the town
of Oxford but little.
As already pointed out, though the Canons of S. Frideswide occur
in the Survey as possessing property, they seem to show no sign of
activity at all. It can scarcely be altogether due to their work not
being recorded.
One incidental detail may perhaps be briefly alluded to in con-
nection with the religious aspect of the place at this time. It seems
1 Probably Turchil, who in the Domesday Survey is styled Vice-comes. He was
sheriff of Warwickshire.
2 The charter is preserved as an ' inspeximus ' amongst the Patent Rolls 8th Hen.
VI. Part II. memb. 10. Other copies are preserved in other charters, and it is
printed in Dugdale's Monasticon, ed. 1846, vol. viii. p. 1269. There are only two
signatures of witnesses, viz. L. Archbishop and E. Sheriff. The first must be Arch-
bishop Lanfranc, the second may be Eadward the sheriff (?) of Oxfordshire. The date
of this charter may be said to be limited between Aug. 29, 1070, when Lanfranc
was appointed and (probably) April 21, 1073, when Pope Alexander died.
Appendix A, § 90.
3 William of Malmesbury gives what purports to be an official document con-
taining the list of the Bishops present at the consecration of Archbishop Lanfranc,
Aug 29, 1070 ; in it occurs, ' Remigius Dorcensis sive Lincolniensis? Gesta Ponti-
Jicum, Rolls Series, 1870, p. 39.
* ' Residuam dimidiam carucatae terrae habuit et habet Sancta Maria de Lincolia
in qua nunc est episcopatus.' Domesday Survey, fol. 336a, col. 1. Remigius too is
always cited as Bishop of Lincoln, e.g. Episcopus Lincolniensis tenet Dorchecestre
(fol. 155 a, col. 2).
2i8 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
that two monks had gone forth from the Monastery at Evesham to
beg for money for restoring their church, and Oxford, then, perhaps,
as it is now, was thought to be a likely place in which to obtain sub-
scriptions ; and it seems, in order to evoke the piety of subscribers, they
carried with them the relics of S. Egwin. The chronicler writes : —
1 When the aforesaid brothers, being sustained by the relics of
S. Egwin, had with rejoicing reached Oxford, and were preaching the
word ; and while the people were looking on, a certain man of great
faith, as it afterwards appeared, humbly approached the shrine of
S. Egwin amongst the others, and most devoutly said three prayers in
presence of the people, and at each prayer putting his hand into his
pouch, and taking thence a treble offering, he made the same to God's
Saint V
It would appear a thief was present, and through the intervention
of the Saint he was detected in robbing the good man who was intent
in his prayers. It seems also, by the good offices of the Saint, the
thief, who was condemned to die in consequence of the discovery, was
pardoned. The little story is graphically told, and as the date is
fixed to the time of Abbot Agelwin of Evesham, who died in 1086,
under whose direction the two monks went forth, with the relics, it
affords just a glimmer of the religious life of the period, though it does
not add much to our information ; nothing is told us as to where the
two monks resided when they honoured Oxford with the exhibition
of S. Egwin's relics.
Lastly, it will be observed that Robert D'Oilgi is recorded to have
built a bridge in Oxford. Among works of piety this has always
ranked very high with the monastic writers, and hence it is that
D'Oilgi's building of a bridge follows on after his restoring of churches,
and benefactions to the poor. It was a monk of Abingdon, some
three hundred and fifty years afterwards, who, when in the early part
of Henry VI's reign a Guild of Abingdon had erected the bridge
over the stream, hitherto only forded, and subject to all the dangers
of fords, wrote: —
* Of alle Werkys in this Worlde that ever were wrought
Holy Chirche is chefe. . . .
Another blissed besines is brigges to make,
There that the pepul may not passe after greet showres,
Dole it is to draw a deed body oute of a lake
That was fulled in a fount stoon, and a Fclow of ouresV
1 Chronicon Abbatiac de Evesham, Rolls Series, 1863, p. 55. Appendix A, § 91.
2 The autograph of the poem, consisting of a hundred lines, is preserved framed
in the Hall of Christ's Hospital, Abingdon. The lines are now difficult to deci-
pher, having been written, as the colophon states, in the 36th Henry VI. 1448. The
OXFORD AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST. 219
There can be no doubt but that the bridge which is still called High
or Hythe l Bridge is the one meant in the record. There is no work
of R. D'Oilgi's time visible, but the same site must have been preserved
during the successive rebuildings. By this means the road along the
north of Oxford was connected with the west, and indeed it was, prob-
ably, the only outlet in this direction 2. The peculiar position of the
Castle at Oxford must be taken into account in judging of the roads
and streets. In most towns the Castle occupies, if not a central, at least
the highest position ; here it occupies almost the lowest. The ascent
of Queen Street to the high level at Carfax must have been dangerous
to the successful defence of the Castle, and therefore, lest the town were
taken by the enemy, no regular communication would in an ordinary way
be provided from the town into the Castle. That there was a bridge
across the deep ditches of the Castle, leading from the town, some-
where about Castle Street, may be surmised, as there appear traces of
it on the later maps, but such a bridge would be a small one of wood,
and easily destroyed during times of siege, if necessary. The site had
been chosen when the Danish incursions were mainly effected by
means of the rivers, and therefore a spot had to be chosen which
would command the streams. When D'Oilgi came, it must have been
somewhat against his will that he found himself obliged to accept the
position. It would have cost too much to have erected a new castle
at Carfax, and it would have caused much dissatisfaction to the
citizens and owners, in consequence of the destruction of houses which
it would have entailed. On the whole, then, it must be assumed that he
made the old Castle, of the tenth century, as secure as he could, modify-
ing it to suit the requirements of the time rather than build another, and
still keeping it to guard the course of the Thames, but leaving no en-
trance into the town of Oxford from this side. All persons coming
across the meadows from the west, and all the goods disembarked
at the ' Hythe ' from the barges and boats, would have to be taken in
at the north gate of the town, the road passing along the north bank
of the city ditch, and following, probably, exactly the same course
as that followed by George Street at the present day.
last two lines of the extract may be interpreted : ' Sad it is to drag out of a pool
of water a dead body which had been once dipped in the Font, and one of our
community,' referring evidently to what sometimes happened in flood times.
1 Saxon Hyth ; a small port or haven at which boats could land ; in this case
it would have more the signification of a wharf.
2 West gate was a small gate at the western end of the street running along the
inside of the southern wall of the city : it probably led to the Castle Mill and the
meadows beyond and was more of a postern than a city gate.
220 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
There would have been naturally an entrance into the Castle on the
west. It is impossible, however, to determine exactly the site of the
bridge and gates. We have no remains, and the little evidence which
we possess in the accounts of the works done at the Castle, in the
thirteenth and fourteenth century, proves nothing respecting the
arrangement in the eleventh ; while the earliest plans we possess date
only back to the sixteenth century, and these from their perspective
drawing are not to be depended on for laying down the lines very
accurately upon a modern map1.
1 A striking plan is contained in Agas' map of Oxford, dated 1578 ; and a plan
of the castle precincts is in the possession of the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church.
This is also of the time of Queen Elizabeth, and is engraved in Skelton's Oxonia
AtUiqua Res/aura/a, 1843, PI. 127. In the new Ordnance Survey of ten feet to
the mile, dotted lines representing the supposed line of the Castle ditch are
inserted. As also the supposed sites of the western and eastern bridge. They
appear however to be based upon the conjectural plan given in King's Vestiges of
Oxford Castle.
CHAPTER XL
The Description of Oxford in 1086, as given in
the Domesday Survey.
Towards the close of the eleventh century a document far more
full and complete as to details than any previous document which has
been yet noted, crowns the collections of the materials on which the
early history of the city of Oxford rests. It is called — for what reason
has not been satisfactorily ascertained — 'The Domesday Survey/
There is no other document to be compared with it, which, being of
such an early date, gives so close an insight into the status of the king-
dom, or is so valuable from the historical point of view. While, how-
ever, on the one hand it gives so much information, it creates on the
other so great a desire for more, that it may be said in some respects
to be disappointing ; for there are so many points on which a very few
additional words or facts would have given a much greater importance
and value to the rest. If, for instance, it had told us the exact popu-
lation of Oxford, giving some summary of the occupations, or even
stating the number of actual burgesses, it would have cleared up many
doubts. In the thousands of manors, representing our country villages,
we have minute descriptions of how many servi, how many villani,
how many dordarn, and how many ploughs they each had ; but in the
towns, where similar information would be more interesting, there it is
absolutely wanting. So again the number of churches even is left
very doubtful, and only to be approximately arrived at by incidental allu-
sions ; nor is there a single reference to a public building of any kind
in this city, not even to the Castle. The work is compiled in so per-
functory a manner, that it amounts only to a schedule of the sources
of taxation, yet at the same time the data actually given afford material
from which much may be deduced, throwing light upon the extent
and state of Oxford at this period.
The Domesday Survey has been the subject of much criticism, but
beyond the internal evidence which the work itself affords of its origin
and purpose, the only direct and authoritative account we have is con-
tained in an addition to the one Anglo-Saxon Chronicle which was
continued to this period, namely, that which, as to its earlier portion,
222 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
was probably compiled within the monastery of Peterborough. It
runs : —
'After tins the king had a great council, and very deep speech
with his ' witan ' about this land, how it was peopled, or by what
men ; then sent his men over all England, into every shire, and
caused to be ascertained how many hundred hides were in the shire, or
what land the king himself had, and cattle within the land, or what
dues he ought to have, in twelve months, from the shire. Also he
caused to be written how much land his archbishops had, and his
suffragan bishops, and his abbots, and his earls; and- -though I may
narrate somewhat prolixly — what or how much each man had who was
a holder of land in England, in land, or in cattle, and how much money
it might be worth. So very narrowly he caused it to be traced out,
that there was not one single hide, nor one yard of land, nor even — it
is shame to tell, though it seemed to him no shame to do — an ox, nor
a cow, nor a swine, was left, that was not set down in his writ. And
all the writings were brought to him afterwards1.'
On these few words later writers have built theories, and in ex-
panding the statements there have arisen, naturally, many discrepan-
cies as to the date which may be ascribed to the compilation. The
passage above quoted appears under the year 1085, and there can be
little doubt that at this time the commission was issued. The colophon
at the end of the second volume of the Domesday Survey corroborates
the date, by giving that of the completion : —
i In the year 1086 from our Lord's Incarnation, and in the twentieth
year of William's reign, this description was made, not only of those
three countries (i.e. Essex, Norfolk, and Suffolk), but also of the others2.'
And as regards the part containing Oxfordshire, this date is practically
corroborated inasmuch as under the land of Robert d'Oilgi a certain
hide and a half in ' Ludewelle ' (i.e. Ledwell, a hamlet of Sandford in
North Oxfordshire), is recorded to have been given by the king to him
at the siege of S. Suzanne, in Maine s. This siege was commenced
in 1083, and was not concluded till 1085 4. With respect to the sur-
vey of the oxen, cows, and swine, referred to by the chronicler (i'f it
1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle E, sub atmo, 1085. Appendix A, § 92. There is an
incidental reference in the same Chronicle to the Survey under the year 1087 ; in
summing up the events of William's life the chronicler says ' He reigned over
England, and by his sagacity so thoroughly surveyed it that there was not a hide
of land within England, that he knew not who had it, or what it was worth, and
afterwards set it in his writ.'
2 Domesday Survey, 181 6, vol. ii. p. 450. The words are 'Anno millesimo octo-
gesimo sexto ab incarnatione Domini, vigesimo vero regni Willelmi facta est ista
descriptio, non solum per hos tres comitatus sed etiam per alios.'
3 Domesday Survey, folio 185 b.
4 Ordcric Vital, Bk. VII. cap. 8 (10). Orderic, however, implies that the siege
was protracted to four years.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 223
was carried out in Oxfordshire), no copy has, unfortunately, been
handed down, and we are therefore dependant on the abstract in the
Liber de Wintonia, or the Exchequer Domesday as it is commonly
called1.
The first page relating to Oxfordshire (that is, the recto of folio 154
of the first volume) is given in the present work in facsimile, and
therefore needs no description; further, a transcript of the same (in
extended Latin) will be found in the Appendix ; it only remains there-
fore here to give the whole in English, and for the sake of convenience
this is given in a tabular form, but the wording of the original is
preserved as closely as the tabulation will allow.
IN THE TIME OF King Edward Oxford paid to the King for toll
and gable and all other customs yearly ^20
and six sextaries of honey.
But to Earl Algar ^10
in addition to the Mill which he had within the city.
When the King went on expedition 20 burgesses went with him for all
others, or they gave ^20 to the King that all might be free.
NOW Oxford pays by tale of twenty [pence] in the ora £60
In the town, as well within the wall as without, there are 243 houses
paying geld, and besides these there are 478 2 so waste and destroyed
that they cannot pay the geld.
s. d.
The King has 20 mural mansions paying 13 io.3 Which were Earl Algar's,
then and now in Time of K. Edwd.
„ o 6. Belonging to Shipton
„ o 4. Belonging to Bloxham
„ 2 6. Belonging to Risborough
„ o 4. Belonging to Tuiford 4
(one of these is waste).
Wherefore they are called mural mansions, because if there shall
be need, and the King command it, they shall repair the walls.
To the lands which Earl Alberic held belong 1 Church and 3 mansions :
of these 2 mansions paying 2 4 lie to the Ch. of S. Mary
„ 1 „ ,,50 lies to Bureford
To the lands which Earl W. held,
belong 9 mansions paying 7 o. Three are waste
Abp. of Canterbury has 7 „ „ 3 2. Four are waste
Bp. of Winchester has 9 „ ,,52. Three are waste
Bp. of Bayeux has 18 „ ,,13 4. Four are waste
1 For some of the western counties, however, it seems the first copy has been
preserved in the Exon Domesday belonging to the Dean and Chapter of Exeter
Cathedral (Domesday ed. 181 6, vol. iv. p. 1) and for portions of Eastern counties
in the Inquisitio Eliensis {Ibid. p. 495).
2 In the original, ' Five hundred houses, save twenty-two.'
3 In the original ' Fourteen shillings save twopence.'
4 In the original ' Buckinghamshire ' is added.
and he has 1
mansion
and another 1
»
and a third 1
»
and 2
others
--4
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Bp. of Lincoln has 30 mansions paying 18
Bp. of Coutanccs has 2 „
Bp. of Hereford has 3 „
Abbeyoi S. Edmund's has 1 „
Abbey of Abingdon has 14 „
Abbey of Eglesham has 13 „
and 1 church
Earl of Moreton has 10 „
Earl Hugh has 7 „
Earl of Evreux has 1 „
Henry of Ferieres has 2 „
William Pevrel has 4 „
Edward the Sheriff 2 „
Ernulf of Hesding 3 „
Berengar of Todeni 1 „
Milo Grespin 2 „
Richard de Curci 2 „
Robert D'Oilgi 12 „
Roger of Ivri 15 „
Rannulf Flammard 1 „
Wido of Reinbodcurth 2 „
Walter Gifard 17 „
The predecessor of Walter had one of these, of the gift of K. Edward,
of 8 virgates which paid customary dues in Time of K. Edward.
Jernio has 1 mansion paying o 6 belonging to Hamtone
The son of Manasses 1 „ ,,04,, to Blecesdone
All these afore written hold the aforenamed mansions free because they
repair the wall. All the mansions which are called mural were in Time of
King Edward free from all customary payment except for expedition and
repairing the wall.
J.
d.
18
6.
Sixteen are waste
I
2
I
1.
One is waste
0
6.
Belonging to Tainton
7
3-
Eight are waste
9
0.
Seven are waste
3
0.
Nine are waste
5
8.
Four are waste
0
0.
One is waste
5
0
1
5.
Two are waste
5
0
1
6.
One is waste
0
6
0
1
7
5
4-
Four are waste
20
4-
Six are waste
0
0
8
22
0.
Seven are waste
The Priests of S. Michael's
2
mansions
paying 4
4
The Canons of S. Frideswide
15
?>
)>
I I
0.
Eight are waste
Coleman had while he lived
3
»
>t
3
8
William has
1
>>
»
1
8
Spracheling
1
5)
jj
0
0
Wluui the Fisherman
1
j>
j>
2
8
Alwin has
5
n
)>
3
1.
Three are waste
Edric
1
55
>>
0
0
Harding and Leveva
9
55
)>
12
0.
Four are waste
Ailric has
55
jj
0
0
Dereman
55
»
1
0
Segrim
J)
5)
1
4
Another Segrim
J)
5J
2
0
S me win
)>
35
0
0
Goldwin
J)
»
0
0
Eddid
5J
»
0
0
Swetman
5)
J)
0
8
Sewi
))
»
0
0
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY. 12$
s.
d.
Leveva
i mansion paying
o
o. Waste. Paid T.K.E. lod.
Alveva
1 55
55
o
IO
Alward
1 55
55
o
IO
Alwin
1 55
55
o
o. Waste
Brictred and Derman
I 55
55
I
4
Alwi
I 55
55
o
o
Derewen
I
55
o
6
Alwin the Priest
i house
55
o
o. Waste
Levric
I 55
55
o
o Likewise.
Wluric
i mansion
55
o
o. Waste, and yet if there be
need he shall repair the wall.
Swetman the Moneyer i house free
3
4
Godwin
i mansion paying
o
°)
Ulmar
I 55
55
o
o
Goderun
I 55
55
o
o
y These five pay nothing.
Godric
1 55
55
o
o
Alwi
I 55
55
o
o,
Swetman
2 mural mnsns
•55
3
o
Another Swetman
i free mansion „
o
9 for the same service.
Sawold has
9 mansions
55
13
o. Six are waste.
Lodowin
i house
55
o
o. In which he resides free,on
account [of repairing] the wall.
Segrim
3 houses free
55
5
4. One is waste.
Alwin
i house free
55
2
8
For repairing the wall,
and if when there is need, the wall is not repaired by him who ought to
do it, he shall either forfeit forty shillings to the King or lose his house.
All Burgesses of Oxford have common of pasture without the wall, which
pays 6s. %d. x
After this follows the list of the ' holders of Land in Oxfordshire.'
There are, however, later on, under the Survey of Oxfordshire, two
other passages relating to Oxford, which it will be convenient to give
here, under the heading ' No. XXVIII, the land of Robert de Oilgi/
and they run as follows : —
' The same Robert has in Oxford, forty-two houses let to tenants
{domos hospitatas) as well within as without the wall. Of these
1 6 ... . pay geld and gable,
the rest pay neither, on account of poverty they cannot ;
and he has 8 mansions waste
and thirty acres of meadow near the wall, and a mill of ios.
The whole is worth £3.
And for one manor he holds with the benefice of S. Peter . . . . 2
' The Church of S. Peter of Oxeneford holds of Robert 2 hydes in Holy-
well {Haliivelle). Land one carucate. There is one plough and a half
1 Domesday Survey, folio 154 a, cols. 1 and 2. See Frontispiece. Also Appendix
A, § 93-
2 The sentence is incomplete, a blank space being left vacant in the MS. for
another line to be filled in, which was not done.
226 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
there, and twenty-three men having gardens {bortalos). There are 40 acres
meadow there. It was worth 20s., it is now [worth] 405-. This land has
not paid tax or rendered any dues1.'
It is not to be ascertained for certain whether the references to the
status and value of property, or customary payments, in the Time of
King Eadward, are derived from oral testimony given by jurors who
were cited to give evidence, or from written testimony, that is from
some previous ' Domesday ' already in existence, or from different
geld-rolls. The question is one of some interest ; for, if there was
a definite record before them, the references would probably belong to
some one ascertainable date ; if from oral evidence, they would vary
according to the ages or extent of the memories of the jurors, or other
incidental circumstances, which might cause the state of things as they
existed in the early years of Eadward's reign, to be recorded in one in-
stance, and that as they existed at the close of his long reign of twenty-
three years in another. The probabilities are, that in some cases the
evidence was taken in one way, in others another way, but the results
entered upon the record without any distinction. It may be taken
as tolerably certain that, taken as a whole, T. R. E. does not represent
the state of things at King Eadward's death, in January 1066. The
opening paragraph, for instance, in reference to Oxford, refers to the
state of things somewhere between 1057 and 1062, since Earl ^Elfgar
is named as the earl to whom the dues were paid, and we are, in con-
sequence, left much in the dark as to whether Earl Eadwin succeeded
him. Undoubtedly, on the next page of the Survey we read that
' from the lands of Earl Eadwin in Oxfordshire, and in Warwickshire,
the king has one hundred pounds and one hundred shillings V but
this perhaps is not absolute proof that Eadwin was recognized Earl
over this district. We find that nearly the whole of the property of
Earl ^Elfgar throughout the country, and it was very large, is confis-
cated to the king's use, and in Oxford the customs due both to the
King and Earl are merged into one. So far as direct annual money pay-
ment went the amount assessed appears here to have been doubled by
William, that is, sixty instead of thirty pounds was to be paid annually3.
1 Domesday Survey, folio 158 a and 158 b, Appendix A, § 94.
2 Under the conjoined manors of Uloxham and Adderhury we find 'Soca duorum
hundredorum pertinet huic manerio ; Edwinus comes tenuit hoc manerium' and a
few paragraphs later, ' De terra Edwini Comitis in Oxeneford [scire] et in Warwic-
cire, habet rex c libras et c solidos.' Domesday, fol. 154b, col. 2.
3 The Abingdon Chronicle helps us to the value of the ora. In giving an
account of the foundation of the chapel of Kingston Bagpuiz in the reign of
William Rufus, the chronicler refers to a payment of ' duas oras, i.e. XXXII dena-
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY. %2J
At the same time the sixty sextaries1 of honey appear to have been fore-
gone as a customary payment; as to the provision for twenty bur-
gesses to go on ' expedition ' for all the rest nothing is said, possibly all
were now held liable. The Mill which Earl JElfgar held is described
as ' infra civitatem' but it was probably the Castle Mill, and so went
to the crown, though it is not mentioned ; it is not likely to have been
left in the hands of the town, nor is there any reference to it being
given to S. George's or any other religious foundation.
The next entry is an important statistical item, namely, the number
of houses. The word domus is used, but throughout the detailed
account of the possessors the word mansio is used. For all statistical
purposes, as will be shown presently, the words here mean practically
the same thing. The total number then is 243, and though the details
of the Survey will not show how the whole number is made up, all but
eleven are accounted for. It will be observed by the tabulated list of
the mansions, that they are thus distributed : —
The King has 25
Earls Alberic and W. had
The Archbishop and five Bishops ....
Three Abbeys
Seventeen (supposed) followers of the Conqueror, &c
Priests 'and Canons in Oxford
Thirty-seven (supposed) citizens of Oxford
Deducting the vastae from the others, we have remaining 190, under the
survey of Oxford. Besides these Robert D'Oilgi is returned as respon-
sible for 42 houses 2 in addition to the eight he holds, returned as vastae,
and this brings the total to 232 ; leaving eleven to be accounted for to
rios {Chron. Mon. Ab. ii. p. 30, 121). Sixteen pennies therefore was the normal
value ; but the payment from Oxford was to be made in the full value, i.e. of 20
pennies in the ora. As the ora was the twelfth part of the pound, the result would
be the payment of 240 pence, the standard which we still retain.
1 The Sextary seems to have varied in capacity, and was applied to wine, oil,
honey, and even dry products: it is often qualified, e.g. in Gloucester 'XII Sex-
taria mellis ad mensuram ejusdem Burgi ' (Domesday, fol. 162 a). In another place in
the same country it is ' ad mensuram regis.' {Ibid. fol. 1 66 a). Kelham quotes Selden
as computing the measure in respect of honey to be about one quart and weighing
four pounds. But authors differ, the result varying from a pint to a gallon.
2 Although several of Robert D'Oilgi' s houses are returned as not being able to
pay, still they are not returned as vastae, and would therefore be reckoned as liable.
It is quite possible he held additional houses in the manor of Holywell, i.e. ' the
manor held with S. Peter's,' but the line, as pointed out, is wanting; and these
houses might be included in the 243 although without the wall.
Q 2
Vastae.
25
of which
1
12
»
■>■)
3
69
»
3>
28
28
■>•>
)>
15
83
)>
•>1
34
18
>>
»
9
62
j>
»
17
297
107
228 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
bring the total up to 243 l. Of the remaining 371 returned as vaslae
we have no information at all given us as to whom they belonged.
The summary of the houses, as already said, would have been much
more valuable if the number of the population had been added, and in
all probability it was ascertained, or at least readily ascertainable. As
it is, we are left to base the population of Oxford on a guess' of the
average number of occupants of each house compared with what now
exists ; and to do this so many considerations have to be taken into
account that it is very difficult to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion.
From the sixteenth century onwards, there has been a tendency to in-
crease not only the area but the height of our town houses, that is,
there would be room for a larger number of occupants in each house;
concurrently, however, with this increase of space there has been a
demand for greater accommodation for each occupant, so that the
extended space of each house has been thereby more than counter-
balanced by the extended demand of the occupants. This has not
been the case so much with the densely packed districts in the low
lying suburbs of our larger towns, for there the occupants per house
1 From the very short and obscure manner in which the entries under Oxford are
made (and this has already been alluded to), it is perhaps impossible, even with
help of corroborative data derived from entries under the several manors to discover
the exact method on which the numbers were computed. Under two manors in
Berkshire, there are references to houses in Oxford (the terms hagae being used),
and it is quite possible that they are not included at all in the computation of the
243 under Oxfordshire. First under Estralei (i. e. Streatley) Geoffrey of Man-
deville (whose name does not occur in the Oxford list at all) is returned as holding
' 1 haga of \od. in Oxineford.' (Folio 62 a, col. I.) Next under Stivetune (i.e.
Steventon) which was held by the king we find 'Ad hoc manerium pertinuerunt
in Oxeneford XIII hagae reddentes XII solidos et VI denarios et unum pratum de
XX solidis. Modo homines de Hundredo dant quod Robertus de Oilgi istud tenuit
suspicanter; [nil] aliud sciunt eo quod est in alia scira (col. 2) Domesday 57 b.'
If all of these thirteen were to be included in the list the total would be brought
up to 245.
Moreover there is a puzzling entry under Wallingford as follows : Rainaldus
habet tinam acram in qua sunt XI mansurae de XXVI denarios, et pertinent in
Eldeberic (i.e. Albury) quae est in Oxeneford. 'Domesday, folio 56a, col. 2.
Possibly the last word is meant for Oxfordshire, but it follows on after a direct
reference to Oxenefordscire, and is distinctly written Oxeneford as if it was meant
for the town ; mansurae too are seldom found except in towns ; at least it would
be strange that so small a manor as Aldbury seems to have been, should have
had 1 1 mansurae recorded ; and under Oxfordshire itself the only reference to
Aldeberie is at folio 161 where the same Rainbald is returned as holding five hides
there. But if the hagae are at Wallingford and belonging to Oxford, we have in
this the converse of the circumstance recorded concerning those at Steventon.
Also it may be added that under the Survey of Wallingford (folio 56a, col. 2) it
is noted that Saulf of Oxford holds one liaga free, and that the abbot of Abingdon
has 'two acres on which there are 7 hagae of four shillings and they belong to
Oxford.'
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY.
229
seem to have increased ; on the other hand, in the central parts of
towns the relative population to the houses has considerably decreased
in consequence of buildings for commercial purposes being much
extended and swallowing up small inhabited tenements ; and yet in
these larger buildings there are few, if any, residents.
But, as regards Oxford, it is very important to bear in mind, not
only the rapid growth which the present century has seen, but also the
character of that growth. With regard to the first point a table showing
the number of houses and the population at the several times when
the census was taken during this century, will convey in the clearest way
the state of the case. The average of occupants per house is added
in another column, and this shows the fluctuation of the population in
respect of the houses, the ratio varying in consequence of the circum-
stances already detailed. It has been thought well also to prefix the
numbers, though not very reliable, given on Faden's map, which carry
back the statistics some twelve years earlier 1 —
Date.
Houses.
1789
1816
1801
1878
1811
2081
18212
2551
18312
3402
Population.
p. H
Date.
Houses.
8392
4'6
1841
4335
10,936
5'8
1851
4736
12,404
6-o
1861
5147
15,761
6-i
1871
5844
19,015
56
1881
6588
Population-
p.H.
*h9lA
5*5
25,727
5*4
26,407
5'i
29,677
5"i
343H4
5*2
But the next point to observe is that the increase is due entirely to
the growth on the outside of the old city wall. The returns of Faden's
map being according to streets, they are not so available for comparison
1 Printed on William Faden's map of Oxford, which bears date Sept. 1, 1789.
This plan was first published by Isaac Taylor in 1750, but the copper-plates were
purchased and various improvements made in them by Faden, bringing the infor-
mation down to his time. It is perhaps doubtful if Faden's statistics can be relied
upon, for it has not been ascertained whence he obtained them. As his total of houses
is within twelve of the Government census taken twelve years later, it may be con-
sidered to cover the same area. Yet while the houses have only been increased by
twelve, it would appear the population had increased by upwards of 2000, if his in-
formation be correct. This discrepancy, however, it should be added, is in no way
due to the University returns, for it is clear Faden has not included them, and they
have been omitted in returns extracted from the Census also of 1801. Hence also,
for the sake of uniformity, and to avoid the anomalies arising from the census being
sometimes taken in term time, at others not, the occupants of the Colleges have
been deducted from the population throughout the table as well as the Colleges
themselves from the number of houses.
2 In the returns of 182 1 and 1831 for some reason they have included the houses
and population of Grandpont, on the Berkshire side of the river, though still in the
Parish of St. Aldate's, but they have not done so in any other of the returns. About
70 houses and about 350 population should therefore be deducted from the total of
those years to make the returns uniformly accurate.
Houses.
2\
per
House.
230 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
as those of the census, and therefore in the following tables the year
1 80 1 is compared with the year 1881, thus showing a period of eighty
years' increase.
Within the City Wall, 1801 —
Parishes entirely within the city wall, i. e. of
All Saints, S. John, S. Martin, S. Mary the
Virgin ; according to the Census
The portions of bordering Parishes of S.
Aldate, S. Ebbe, S. Michael, S. Peter in the
East, and S. Peter le Bailey, within the walls ;
Computed at
Total
Popula-
tion.
U!
2913
4396
5^9
6-o
Without the City Wall, 1801 —
Parishes entirely without the city wall, i.e.
of Holywell, S. Mary Magdalen, S. Giles, S.
Thomas, and S. Clement » ; according to the
Census '
Remaining portions of Parishes of S. Aldate,
S. Ebbe, S. Michael, S. Peter in the East,
and S. Peter le Bailey ; computed at .
Total
Within the City Wall, 1881—
Parishes entirely within the city wall, i. e. of
All Saints, S. John, S. Martin, and S. Mary
the Virgin ; according to the Census
Portions of Parishes of S. Aldate, S. Ebbe, S.
Michael, S. Peter in the East, and S. Peter
le Bailey, within the wall ; computed at
Total
846
4852
295
1688
1141
6540
199
1076
507
2476
706
3552
57
57
5'4
4*9
5'o
Without the City Wall, 1881 —
Parishes entirely without the city wall, i.e.
Holywell, S. Mary Magdalen, S. Giles, S.
Thomas, and S. Clement ; according to the
Census .....•••
Remaining portions of Parishes of S. Aldate,
S. Ebbe, S. Michael, S. Peter in the East,
and S. Peter le Bailey ; computed at .
Total2
4608
24,391
1274
6201
5882
30,592
5' 3
5*o
5*2
1 S. Clement's parish, in the census of 1801, is given separately under the
hundred of Bullingdon, but has been added here for the sake of uniformity.
2 To these totals have to be added 42 Colleges and University buildings, of
which in 1 801, 24 are reckoned, situate some within the walls and some with-
out, with a population of 1,171 ; in 18S1, 42 buildings arc thus returned, with
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVE Y. 23L
The results shown by this table are striking, and will illustrate what
has been said about the difficulties which arise in attempting to obtain
an average of occupants to a house. Within the wall, the separate
tenements seem during the eighty years to have been actually reduced
in number, that is, for every new house erected one at least had been
destroyed, or for every garden or open space covered with a new
building at least two buildings had been merged into one ; and if the
computation be correct, the population meanwhile within the line of
the old city wall had decreased by over 800 1> While, on the other
hand, the portions outside the line of the city wall had gradually
increased till the 1000 houses of 1801 had become nearly 6000 in
1 88 1, and the population of 6000 had become 30,000 2.
a population of 428, bringing up the total population of the parishes (but
excluding the part of S. Aldate's on the Berkshire side of the river') to 34,572,
resident in 6630 houses (i.e. 5.5). But the municipal limits of Oxford, which
while they omit a portion of S. Giles' and S. Clement's on the one hand, and
include an additional portion of S. Aldate's, and parts of Cowley, Headington,
Marston, North Hincksey, and Wolvercote on the other, bring the total up to
35,264, resident in 6788 houses (i.e. 5.3). The Parliamentary limits include the
above, with the remainder of S. Giles' and S. Clement's, the whole of S. Aldate's,
large portions of Cowley and Headington, besides portions of Iffley and South
Hincksey, and make a total of 40,837 persons, resident in 7840 houses (5*2).
1 The separation of the total number of houses given in a border parish into
those which may be fairly reckoned within the line of the Wall, and those which
must be considered without, has been attempted by computing the apparently
separate tenements drawn on the maps. The statistics of 1801 being compared
with Faden's map of 1789, and those of 1881 with the new Ordnance Survey. Of
course in such matters absolute accuracy is impossible, since in Faden's maps the
houses are drawn in blocks, and even in the new Ordnance Survey it is impossible to
be sure of what constitutes a house. In respect to the partitioning out of the
population, that has been based on the houses, the ratio in the two divisions being
kept similar to that of the general ratio in the whole parish.
a Bearing in mind the difficulty which has been pointed out in the previous note,
as to differentiating in border parishes between those houses which should be reckoned
within the walls and those which lie without, it may be useful, in order to show the
fluctuation which has taken place, to give one or two examples from parishes wholly
within the wall. In All Saints' parish the 88 tenements of 1801 had, in 1851,
fallen to 84, in 1861 they rose to 91, in 1871 they fell to 69, and in 1881 decreased
to 65. S. Martin's parish shows a tolerably steady decrease in the houses during
the nine decades, according to the census, at the following rate, 76, 67, 76, 62, 66,
68, 60, 52, and 47 at which they stood in 188 1. S. Mary's has remained, on the
whole, tolerably stationary, the 57 houses of 1801 being represented by 53 in 1881.
The parish of S. John, with 21 houses in 1801, was practically stationary to 1861,
when there were 22 houses, but in 1871 there were 31, and in 1881, 34 houses.
All the parishes wholly without the wall show in the same series a considerable
increase, and, with scarcely an exception, the increase has been uniformly gradual
and at an increasing rate. Notably S. Giles', the increase of which is shown by the
following series, beginning in 1801, i.e. 184, 256, 294, 509, 620, 860, 964, H47,
and 1602 in 1881.
232 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
It is, however, the area comprised within the old enceinte of the
city with which we have to deal. The area of the city in 1086 could
not have been more extensive than that within the line of the city
wall of the middle ages, and of this the remains are easily to be
traced ; for all practical purposes it may be considered to be identical
with it1.
In the middle of the eleventh century, when Oxford had probably
arrived at the zenith of its early prosperity, and before the disastrous
incursion of 1065, ^ve nnd there was a total of 721 houses, and though
the expression is used, tarn intra murum quam extra, there is no reason
to suppose that many of the houses were then outside ; a few perhaps
clustered round the north and east gates, and several perhaps lay
between the south gate and the river in S. Aldate's parish, and there
were some perhaps in the Manor of Holywell. If we allow that 7 1 of
these were outside, we have, in comparing 1065 with 1881, area for
area, only to compare 650 then with the 700 now; but we must take
into account that there was a great difference in their character. Most
buildings, no doubt, were but of four low walls and a roof; the better
sort of but one storey, i.e. they consisted of the ' celar' and the ' solar,'
for such is the ordinary description throughout all the documents
relating to leases which we possess of the following century. But
although the customs of the time with regard to the privacy, and even
existence of sleeping apartments were different from those of our own,
and even in well-to-do families the domestic arrangements would have
astonished even our artizans at the present day, it is impossible to
assign more than four persons on the average to houses such as these.
But then, as the record tells us, 478 of them were vastae, and in all
probability amongst these there were many which could scarcely be
estimated more than as huts and hovels, and for these the figure four
would be much over the mark.
It is a misfortune that we have but little corroborative evidence of the
number of houses and the population at different periods. The Hundred
Rolls ought to help us, but they, like the Domesday Survey, are made
with a purpose, and though probably a fair estimate of the population
and the number of tenants were before the commissioners, they have
not recorded it. Faden's map in 1 789 represents the houses in blocks,
and it is impossible to count the several tenements, but on comparing
with this map that of Loggan, made a little more than a century
previously (1673), we find to all appearance the number of houses still
1 See the map. Also see/w/, p. 237, as to the relation of the line of 1087 with
that of the mediaeval wall.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE V. 233
less. It is not easy to count them, nor perhaps could the accuracy
of the map be depended upon sufficiently in this respect ; but on the
whole, a comparison points to about 700 at this date being the
number of houses within the city walls. If, however, we go back to
Agas' map of 1578, we shall find it difficult to count more than 450
houses within the city wall. The small number however shown on this
map is due no doubt in part to artistic considerations ; for as Agas has
omitted all the houses on the south side of Broad Street, in order to
bring into prominence the line of the city wall which existed behind
them, so we may venture to think he has omitted several within the
line of the city boundary whenever they interfered with the view.
Probably also many small tenements may have been omitted by
accident, as again several which appear as if they were single houses
may have consisted of two or more beneath a single line of roof.
Still, allowing for all this, there is reason to think that the houses within
the area had probably reached their minimum early in Elizabeth's
reign, since many colleges had been erected during the three previous
centuries, and we know that throughout the middle ages every college
that was founded swallowed up very many separate tenements.
On the whole, then, if we assign a thousand occupants to the 243
houses paying tax at the time of the Survey — that is, a rate of full four
persons per house, we are probably overstating rather than understating
the number ; of these most were residents within the city fortifications,
and some few were occupying tenements outside. This number of
course would be exclusive of the garrison, who would be housed wholly
within the Castle precincts.
That, besides the 245 houses, there were 478 empty or destroyed, is
certainly a very striking fact, and even allowing for certain deductions,
it brings vividly before us a picture of the devastation which the country
had undergone. The circumstances attending this misfortune have
already been referred to \ but as Oxford does not stand alone it may
be worth while to consider those attending some other towns, where
many of the houses are returned in Domesday as vastae.
York, which played a more prominent part in the disturbances which
preceded the Conquest, was in a far worse state even than Oxford.
The record in Domesday runs —
1 Of all the above-named mansions there are only 391 in the hands
of the King, which are let to tenants and paying customary dues,
and 400 which are not let and which pay the better ones a penny,
1 See ante, p. 200.
234 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
others less, and 540 mansions so void (vacuae) that they pay nothing at
all, and 145 mansions are held by Frenchmen (francigenae) l.
But then York suffered the brunt of the insurrection when Tostig
was expelled, besides the siege of William in 1068.
Northampton does not seem to have suffered like Oxford. Possibly
the town was better protected, and the mob was not allowed to pass
within the gates ; possibly also there may have been other causes
which prompted them suddenly to rush on to Oxford instead of stop-
ping to devastate Northampton. Out of 292 houses, which are entered
much after the same manner as those in the Oxford Survey, only
thirty-six are void. Again, Exeter, which stood a siege, duly recorded 2,
seems to have suffered very slightly, for out of 285 there are only
forty-eight returned as ' devastated, after the king came into England V
In several boroughs, however, a large proportion of the houses are
returned as vastae and the like; e.g. at Dorchester, out of a total of
188, there were 100 penitus destructae; at Bridport, out of 120, there
were 20 ita destiiutae that they cannot pay. At Wareham, out of 285,
there were 150 vastae; and at Shaftesbury, out of a total of 257, there
were 80 vastae. All these are in Dorset4. They do not quite reach
the Oxford proportion, which is 66 per cent. ; but Dorchester and
Wareham come very near to it, each with over 52 per cent.
Various causes however are assigned for the description of vastae in
the pages of Domesday. There were many so returned, for instance,
at Lincoln at the time of the Survey, and in this case the commis-
sioners explain the cause thus : —
' Of the aforesaid mansions which were hospitatae there are now . . .
240 vastae. ... Of the aforesaid mansions which are vastae, 166 were
destroyed on account of [building] the castle. The remaining 74,
rendered vastae, are without the bounds of the castle, and are so, not
because of the oppression of the King's Sheriffs and Servants, but be-
cause of misfortune and poverty, and ravage by fire (propter infortunium
paupertatem et ignis exustionem) V
1 Domesday, fol. 298 a, col. 1. Here vacttae is evidently used as synonymous
with vastae. Of the total 1331 it would seem that only 391 were in good condition.
On what grounds the 145 additional houses which were held by Frenchmen were
excused from paying any tax, cannot be well explained.
2 See ante, pp. 196-8.
3 Domesday Survey, fol. 100 a, col. 2. The mode of reference to the siege is
certainly ingenious ; while the two circumstances, namely the slight effect of an
important siege, recorded by all the historians, and the fact that the result is duly
entered in the Survey, tell against the theory that the mansiones vastae in Oxford
are attributable to William besieging the town.
4 Domesday, fol. 75 a, col. 1.
5 This extract shows clearly that vastae does not mean necessarily that all the
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 2$$
In Gloucester 16 houses are recorded to have stood where the
Castle stands, and 14 to be vastae, but the total of the houses is not
given. At Huntingdon 21 appear to have been returned asvaslae because
they ' occupied the place where the Castle stood, and besides these there
were 112 vastae for which the reasons are not given ; neither is it
possible to calculate the total number paying geld.' At Cambridge
the numbers, when added together in the ten different wards, amount to
a total of 371, of which 55 are returned as vastae, and apparently 27
had been destroyed for the Castle, besides several others which appear
from various causes not to have paid rent.
In Wallingford again, where the term haga is used instead of mansio, it
seems that in the time of King Edward there were 276 hagae, but at the
time of the Survey there were 1 3 less ; that is, 8 were destroyed for the
Castle, and the remaining 7, it seems, had been appropriated rent and
tax free, i. e. one for the Moneyer ' as long as he coins money/ and
1 Saulf of Oxford ' had one, but we are not told why. They are not
actually returned as vastae, but it will be observed those which were
freed from customary dues are put in the same category as those which
were destroyed to make way for the extension of the castle, and those
so destroyed are at Lincoln returned as vastae. Such illustrations go
far to show that we must take vastae in a very wide sense ; yet though
we do so, we must not overlook that in the case of Oxford the numbers
are very great and that the term desiructae is used as well.
Although in the summary the word domus is used for the house,
throughout the detailed list it will be observed the word mansio is used,
with only four exceptions. It would appear, from comparing the
entries in other parts of the Survey, that the use of these special terms
is purely arbitrary, and that practically the same thing is meant. It is
possible that the ' mansio ' in the view of the compiler had a slightly
different signification from that of the domus 1, just as the word mansion
has at the present time, and that most of the mansiones stood detached
houses so returned were standing in ruins, but that besides several being void of
tenants, the houses had decreased by so many since the return in King Edward's
Time; the site of 166 houses returned as vastae had been occupied by the castle, and
the word therefore could not mean ruinous buildings, unless indeed, just when the
Survey was being taken these houses were one and all in the process of demo-
lition, which is, on many grounds, improbable ; in other words, it may be said
that the houses in ruins, etc., and those which had disappeared altogether, were
classed in one category.
1 Kelham, in his Domesday Illustrated, p. 267, says that ' matisio and domus
seem to be distinguished, but wherein the difference consisted is not easy to say.
Ellis observes, that ' in a few entries of the Survey mansiones seem to imply
houses simply/ and quotes from Bracton on the distinction of the mansio from the
236 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
and in their own plot of ground, whereas domi might be joined together
and possibly in rare exceptions without any garden or private land
attached; still the difference does not appear to be of any importance
in estimating the number or general character of the tenements.
It will be observed also that certain mansions which are called
' mural ' are exempted from payment, ' on account of their being
compelled to repair the walls V At first sight, it would seem therefore
that Oxford was surrounded by a ' wall,' but there are reasons on the
other hand to suppose that the fortifications were in a considerable
part of earth rather than of continuous stone work, which the word
' wall2,' in its ordinary acceptance, implies. Along the northern side of
the city, which was most open to attack, from being unprotected by
any river, and from the chief road entering Oxford on this side,
there was no doubt a formidable line of defence; this probably
consisted of a vallum faced with stone work on the outer side, beneath
which a deep ditch had been excavated. The masonry was probably
carried to the top of the vallum, and along it the soldiers could easily
pass from one part to another during a time of siege 3. There was
of course a parapet, but this may have been as likely of wood as of
stone. The chief defences, as regarded the greater part of the city,
villa and that from the mancrium (lib. v. cap. 28) in the following words — ' Mansio
antcm esse poterit conslructa ex pluribus domibus ' velzina quaeerit habitatio una et
sola sine vicitio.'1 Ellis' Introduction to Domesday, 1885, vol. i. p. 243.
Under Norwich, in the Survey, vol. ii. fol. 117a, will be found perhaps the
best example where the distinction appears to be recognized ; but in the Oxford
statistics there is no reason to suppose that the ' mansiones ' were detailed in
addition to the 243 domi paying geld ; this would lead to a considerable over-
estimate of the population of Oxford at the time.
1 The repair of the town wall was provided for by the English laws; e.g. in those
of Athelstan the following occurs : ■ And we ordain that every burh be repaired
fourteen days after Rogation Day.' Thorpe's Laws and Institutes, 8vo, 1840; p. 247.
2 The word murus no doubt, as a rule, in mediaeval writings, signified a stone
wall, and the fortifications of the Roman towns, to which it was originally applied,
were nearly always of stone or similar material. But as appears by representations,
e.g. on Trajan's column, the Romans adopted wooden brattishes and palisading in
addition to the stone fortifications, and this practice continued throughout the
Middle Ages ; so that the word murus t adopted from the Romans, may well have
included the fortifications as a whole, and been applied when the palisades were the
chief means of defence. Varro, it may be noted, has this passage in his treatise
De Re Rustica (lib. i. c. 14), 'Ad Viam Salariam, in agro Crustumiuo, vidcre licet
locis aliquot conjunctos aggeres cum fossis, ne Jlumcn agris noceant aggeres qui
faciunt (sic) sine fossd, eos quidem vocant muros, tit in agro Rcatino? This of
course only relates to the ' dykes,' as we term them, such as we see in fen districts,
but it shows that the word did not, even with the Romans, necessarily imply the
existence of stone. In the Bayeux tapestry, one or two representations of the siege
of fortified towns show the wooden palisading and the mode of attack by fire.
3 This probably accounts for the doorways in the towers of the Castle and of
S. Michael's. See ante, p. 210, and />ost, p. 260.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 237
were the ditches and the streams, and no doubt a continuous vallum
of earth, which in time of danger was surmounted by woodwork of
various kinds to protect the soldiers from the arrows. So far as can
be judged it was the usual method, and the walling was exceptional.
It must be remembered also that Robert D'Oilgi, on his appointment
to the governorship, is not recorded to have fortified the town, and
though in all probability he put the existing fortification in order,
throughout the line of e?iceinte, and by building S. Michael's tower over
against the North gate he added much to the strength of this part of
the fortification, he could not well have built a wall round the town,
since it is not probable that in Henry the Third's time the whole work
would have had to be done over again ; and yet the money expended
then, implies fortifications in progress on a very extended scale. Besides
which, it is implied by the account of the siege in Stephen's reign,
that ditches and water were the chief means of defence, and fire the
chief mode of attack.
The 'mural' houses were therefore those which had to keep the
fortifications generally in an efficient state ; and this consisted mostly
of repairing and clearing the vallum and trench, especially the latter,
when it was a ditch into which the water flowed ; and as the position
of Oxford was admirably situated in respect of water, few if any of the
ditches were likely to be dry1. They had also to repair the wooden
brattishes and palisades with which the vallum was surmounted.
Here, however, arises the question, What was the extent of this line
of enceinte ? in other words, did the mediaeval wall, of which we possess
sufficient remains to be certain as to its course on the three sides of
the town (the Castle occupying the narrowed western side), follow the
original line? The answer is, that in the absence of any traces of
another line of fortifications, and from the natural course of things, it
did so ; and that to all intents and purposes the area enclosed in Henry
the Third's reign was the same as that which was enclosed in William
the Conqueror's reign. That the later wall was built absolutely on the
site of the old vallum throughout, is perhaps saying too much ; indeed
1 Even the ditch above referred to along the outside of the northern wall must
have had some water in it ; this was apparent when the new drainage works in t88o,
which involved digging down a considerable depth in the streets, exposed a portion
of the ditch with the black accumulation of the mud at the bottom. It was
admirably exhibited in section at the end of Turl Street, the gravel bank sloping up
from it and then forming a kind of terrace beneath the city wall, the foundation
of which here proved to be nine feet thick, completing the section. The fosse
obtained the name of the Can-ditch in the middle ages (probably the ' Canal '
ditch or sewer), and gave its name to the street formed by the row of houses built
between the road and the fosse, and which afterwards came to be Broad Street.
2 Vs THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
it would be improbable that it should be so ; as they would scarcely
destroy in all cases the old fortifications till the new ones were nearly
ready, and so they may have built the wall just within or just without
the older line, if circumstances required it, and in one or two cases
along the line, traces of a deep ditch have been found on the inside of
the later line of the mediaeval wall. In Exeter College, for example,
when they dug the foundations for the Rector's house some few years
ago, the remains of what appeared to be an ancient ditch were reached
just within the line of the city wall, which is here visible from the court
at the back of the Ashmolean Museum, although the wall has been
refaced with modern ashlar. The peculiarity especially noted was that
considerable remains of wood, especially osiers, were found in the black
mud at the bottom, such as might well have been thrown in when the
ditch was filled up and the vallum destroyed, the new wall having been
erected on the outside of the old ditch1.
In considering the list of the tenants holding property in Oxford
there are several points deserving attention. Twenty of the mansions
seem to be directly in the kings' hands, but they had been in Earl
^Elfgar's up to 1062, and must have passed from his successor's hands,
whoever that was, into those of the king. Most of the houses in the
county towns held by the tenentes in capite seem to be connected more
or less with manors in that of the neighbouring counties ; probably all
were originally so, but in some cases the county property was sold
without the town house representing it, and sometimes the contrary
may have taken place. For the purpose of attending the courts, which
were held in the towns — which happened very frequently — in days
before hotels existed (and when, as appears to have been the case here
at this time, the abbey accommodation was very slight in comparison
with what S. Frideswide, Oseney, and Rewley would have afforded
a century or so later), it was necessary to have residences set apart for
the lords of the manors, and also in many cases for the under-tenants
also, when they came here on business ; and there can be little doubt
many of these houses were specially entered upon the geld-rolls, as
appropriated to certain manors2.
1 The line of the wall appears to have been altered more than once on the north
side of S. Michael's church ; the last time, perhaps, when the north transept was
thrown out in the fourteenth century. The remains of an old deep ditch were found
when digging on tne site oi llle Ship Inn in 1S83 at some sixty feet within the
so-called Cranmer's Bastion, reckoning from the centre of the ditch to the present
outer wall. This thirteenth century line of wall probably ran between the two,
while the first vallum or wall must naturally have been on the south side of the ditch.
8 The expression so frequently found oijacet or jacuit implies this.
D ESC RIP TION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVE Y. 239
The five mansions next mentioned as belonging to Shipton, Blox-
ham and Risborough1 illustrate this; they had naturally passed to the
king, since we find that the chief manors at these three places
had themselves done so. As to Twyford (which like Risborough is in
the adjoining county of Buckinghamshire) it does not seem to have
had a distinct manor belonging to it, at least it does not occur in the
Survey in the part relating to that county.
Of Earl Alberic we glean but little knowledge from the historians.
He was raised to the earldom of Northumberland soon after the murder
of Walcher, Bishop of Durham, in 1080, but his possessions lay chiefly
in Wiltshire and in a few midland counties. Amongst the latter is found
Oxfordshire, in which he held Iffley (which Azor had held in the time
of King Eadward) and Minster [Lovell]. It is to be noticed that the
surveyors always use the word tenuit and not tenet in regard to Alberic,
so that the earl must have been dead at the time of the Survey ; and
as the phrase occurs more than once Modo sunt in manu Regis, it may
be presumed he had only recently died., and that the lands had as yet
not passed to a successor. In what way Burford was connected with
Earl Alberic does not appear ; as it is divided into three manors, held
respectively by the Bishop of Bayeux, by the Abbey of Abingdon, and
by a certain Ilbod, and as the manors are underlet and no references
given to previous holders it is perhaps hopeless to discover the connec-
tion. Neither is there any document forthcoming which connects Earl
Alberic with S. Mary's Church in Oxford2. We have simply the entry
as it stands, but it certainly would look much as if the Earl had built
the church and alienated two of his houses to the use of the priest
of the church3.
1 Under Riseberge, in the Buckinghamshire division of the Survey, fol. 143 b,
col. 1, there is the following note under Terra Regis, ' Riseberge fnit villa Heraldi.
. . . In hoc manerio jacet et jacuit quidam burgensis de Oxenford ; reddit 11
solidos. It is difficult, however, to explain the exact bearing of this statement
upon the mention of the house in the Oxford list.
2 The words in the Survey do not directly state that he had even held S. Mary's
Church, but there can be little doubt that this is the meaning. It will be observed
that two of the mansions belonged to the church in Oxford, and one to the manor
of Burford.
3 A note in Domesday, under the lands of the Church of Coventry, maybe taken
as an illustration of the change of lands at this time, and shows also Earl Alberic
somewhat in the light of Robert D'Oilgi: ' Huic Ecclesiae [i.e. Conventriensi]
dedit Alwinus vicecomes Cliptone concessit regis Edwardi et filiorum suorum
pro anima sua et testimonio comitatus. Comes Albericus hanc injuste invasit et
ecclesiae abstulif (Domesday, folio 238 b, col. 2). Under the lands of Earl Alberic,
Clipton is named with five other manors : ' Ipse comes tenuit Cliptone Alwinus vice
conies tenuit T.R.E.' At the end appears ' Hae terrae Alberici comitis sunt in
manu Regis,' but this is marked through, and instead is written, Goisfridus de Wirce
240 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Earl W. is no doubt intended for Earl William. Amongst the lands
in Oxfordshire the last entry stands, ' LIX. Hae hifra scriptae terrae
sunt de ft ado Willelmi Comitisx! They are some thirty in number,
< hiefly small portions of land, many of a single hyde and sometimes
less. This is sufficient to account for the nine mansions held in
Oxford. The person referred to must be William Fitz Osbern, who
played an important part in the history of the Norman Conquest. One
of the first earldoms to which King William appointed was that of
Hereford, and though William Fitz Osbern held it till the time of his
death in 107 1, there does not seem to be a trace of his name in the
pages of Domesday among any of the returns belonging to that district.
In fact the only county where his name appears as holding any exten-
sive property is Oxfordshire, and that, as already pointed out, is in
detached portions, scattered throughout the district.
Next in order follow the Bishops' mansions. A good deal of the
episcopal land, so far as can be judged, changed hands during the
first twenty years after the Conquest, although on the whole the English
bishops held perhaps as much at the time of the Survey as before ;
this, however, was due more to the fact that William's favourites were
appointed to episcopal emoluments than that many of the lands qua
church lands had not been confiscated. Practically the number of
manors in the county in the bishops' hands which ought to bear some
relation to the mansions in the town do not do so. First of all we
find Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, whose manors in Oxford-
shire are represented by the solitary Newington2, yet possessed of
seven mansions in Oxford. Walchelin, Bishop of Winchester, with only
the two manors of Witney and Adderbury, which originally belonged
to the bishopric, yet holds nine mansions in Oxford. When, how-
ever, we come to the lands of Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, we find nearly
fifty manors or parts of manors in the county, held by him, which
bear a proper relationship to the eighteen mansions which he held in
Oxford. But this arises probably from the circumstance that there
was here wholesale confiscation. The Domesday record to the first
eas custodit' (Ibid. fol. 239 b, col. 1). This again points to the recent death of
Earl Alberic, his lands being still in custody. It will also illustrate what has been
said of the mansions in towns, to quote from the Survey of the borough of
Warwick: ' Albericus comes habuit IV mansuras quae pertinent ad ten-am quam
tenuit.' Ibid. fol. 238 a, col. 1.
1 Domesday, folio 161 a, col. 1 and 2.
2 A copy of the original gift of this manor by Aelgifu, the mother of Edward the
Confessor, is preserved ' Ic /E/giJ'u sco hlctfdigt Eadweardes cyninges modor,' &c.
See K.C. D. No. 965, vol. iv. 298, and Dugdale,_ed. 1817, vol. i. p. 100.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 241
of the manors held by him adds the note, ' Alwine and Aelfgar held
them freely ; ' and though in the case of two manors a certain Alnoth
is recorded to have held them, we may perhaps be justified in suppos-
ing that all the rest, to the number of some forty-eight or thereabouts,
which have no notes, followed the first; and that in the change from
Alwine and Aelfgar to their successors, and then to the Bishop of
Bayeux, the houses in Oxford were not separated from the manors
belonging to them. In the hands of the Bishop of Lincoln (whose title
of Bishop of Dorchester it will be observed is here, as well as else-
where, already suppressed) there are some ten or a dozen manors, and
some of them very extensive throughout the county, but not sufficient
to warrant the very large number of thirty mansions in Oxford. He
was, however, more unfortunate than the Bishop of Bayeux, for while
of those belonging to the latter less than one-fourth were vastae, of
those belonging to the English bishop more than one-half were so.
But perhaps it is a more remarkable circumstance that neither the
Bishop of Coutances, nor the Bishop of Hereford, have any manors
in the county, and yet have respectively two and three houses in
Oxford ; while on the other hand the Bishops of Salisbury and Exeter
have each a manor, and the Bishop of Lisieux has four in the county,
and yet neither have houses in Oxford.
If we consider the abbeys in the same way, we are met with diffi-
culties and some inconsistencies. The abbey of S. Edmund, though
it had property in Bedfordshire and Northamptonshire, had none in
Oxfordshire ; nor does there seem to be any trace of the connection
of this abbey with Teynton, which, according to the Survey, belonged
to the abbey of S. Denys, near Paris, and which had been given to it
by Eadward the Confessor. There was good reason, however, for the
Abbey of Abingdon having the fourteen mansions, for though it could
not count more than eight or nine manors in the county, it had so
large a number in Berkshire, and consequently so much business to
transact at the courts which were held in Oxford, that this large
number may well have been needed.
In the case of Ensham, however, the matter is different, and we must
look rather to the thirteen houses being somewhat of the nature of an
endowment of their church here ; for the words of the Survey run ' has
one church and xiii mansions/ The connection between Ensham
Abbey and Stowe in Lincolnshire has already been pointed out1, and
Ensham itself is entered amongst the lands of the Bishop of Lincoln2.
1 See ante, p. 170.
2 The record puts the matter very clearly: — 'The Bishop of Lincoln holds
R
&42 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Fortunately a Register and Cartulary of Ensham have been pre-
served1, and thus we have a complete list of the property not only
corroborating but fully explaining and illustrating the passages in
Domesday. Transcripts of two charters of King William should
perhaps be noticed here, since the abbey of Ensham, as will be seen,
was closely connected with Oxford. The first runs : —
1 William King of the English to his Bishops and all his faithful
people in England greeting. Know that I have confirmed the gift
which Earl Leofric and Godiva his wife made to the church of
S. Mary, of Stowe. . . . Further, I grant to the said church, on the
advice of Bishop Remigius, the church of Egnesham, with all the lands
which it now possesses, on this condition, that the Abbot there shall
be ruled by my counsel, whenever he deliberates upon matters con-
nected with these churches And this I do by the counsel
and testimony of L[anfranc] the archbishop : Witnesses, E[dward],
Sheriff and Robert de OiliV
The next runs : —
' I, William King of England, to the men of the Abbey of Stowe
(La Stowe) greeting: I command you that you be obedient to your
Lord, the Abbot Columbanus, as you were to Remigius the Bishop in
all things. Witnesses: Richard de Curci3.'
But the long charter of Bishop Remigius, granted in 1091, i.e. some
five years after the Survey, contains a complete summary of all the
property at that time in their possession. The following passage more
especially concerns Oxford, the thirteen mansions being probably
included under ' rcculis ' :—
' I add also, besides, to the same church of the most glorious mother
of God (i. e. S. Mary's, Stowe), and to the monks living there, a cer-
tain important increase, namely, Egnesham, together with the same
pagus in which it was of old erected, and with all the other members
belonging to it, that is to say, ' Sciffort ' and Rollendricht, also Aerdin-
ton and Micleton and with the little church (ecclesiola) of S. Aebba
situate in the city of Oxford, together with the lesser revenues (reculis)
Eglesham, and the Monk Columbanus of him ; there are 15^ hydes there belonging
to the Church : the same Columbanus holds of the Bishop Scipford ; there are
three hydes ; the same Columbanus holds of the Bishop 5 hydes in Parvi Rollandri.'
Domesday, folio 155 a, col. 2.. Later on also it is noted that Roger of Iveri 'holds
of the Bishop, Ilardintone; this is of the Church of Eglesham.' Both Sniff ord
(which lies about six miles south-west of Ensham) and Ardington (? Yarnton) are
named in the original charter of Ethelred of 1005, and both were held by the
Abbey at the dissolution, the latter being spelt in the ministers' accounts 'Erdyng-
ton.' Little Rollright is about two miles north-west of Chipping Norton.
1 They are in the possession of the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church.
2 Printed in Dugdale' Monasticon, cd. 1846, vol. iii. p. 14. Appendix A, § 95.
3 Ibid. p. 14. From incidental evidence from other sources these two charters
may be dated perhaps about 1075. Appendix A, § 96.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA YSURVE Y. 243
presented to it by the piety of the faithful, and also the two mills on
the stream of water adjoining the said city already erected, together
with all the appurtenances belonging to them, by any right whatever V
A somewhat later charter of confirmation, namely, in Henry the
First's reign, i.e. 1109, refers to certain houses in Oxford: —
' And in Oxford the church of S. Aebba and all that belongs to it ;
and two mills near Oxford and the meadows, and Aerdinton and
whatever the Bishop gave in the exchange of Newerch and Stowe. . . .
William Fitz Nigel gave one house at Oxford. Harding of Oxford,
who went to Jerusalem and died there, gave two houses in Oxford, one
within and one without the borough. Gillebert de Damari gave one
house without the borough, except the customary payment to the King2.'
It is, perhaps, beyond hope to identify the position of any of these
four houses, nor is it clear whether they were given in addition to the
thirteen mansions named already in the Domesday Survey.
These three abbeys are the only religious houses except S. Frides-
wide (which will be found mentioned later) described as holding pro-
perty in Oxford itself. Other religious foundations, however, held
property in the county. The newly founded Abbey of Battle, called
in Domesday Ecclesia De La Batailgez, had had Earl Harold's manor
of Crowmarsh4, on the other side of the river from Wallingford, already
bestowed upon it. The ancient Abbey of Winchcombe in Gloucester-
shire, founded by King Cynewulf in 798, had had amongst its earliest
grants, Enstone, which was retained still. The Abbey of Preaux in
Normandy, in the diocese of Lisieux, founded about 1040, had had
Watlington5 given to it; and the Abbey of S. Denys, near Paris, had
had, according to the charter we possess of Edward the Confessor,
1 From the Ensham Register. In the possession of the Dean and Chapter of
Christ Church. Charter No. 8. Printed in Dugdale, vol. iii. p. 15. Appendix
A, § 97-
2 From the Ensham Register, No. 10, Dugdale, ibid. p. 16. There are one or
two later charters respecting houses in Oxford belonging to the abbey, and though
they throw some light upon the property described in the Survey, they would be
more properly considered in treating of the following century. Appendix A, § 98.
At the Dissolution, according to the Computus Ministrorum Domini Regis
Hen. VIII. (a.d. 1539), Ensham was stlH receiving from ' Tenementa in Oxon.
Villa] the sum of £1 6s. Sd. Dugdale, ibid. p. 32.
! ' Et qxiia in hoc loco, ubi sic constructor est ecclesia, Deus mihi victoriam praebuit
in bello, ob victoriae memoriam, ipsum locum Bellum appellari volui? From the
original, which is preserved amongst the Harleian Charters, No. 83. Printed in
Dugdale, ed. 1846, vol. iii. p. 244.
4 'Abbatia de Labatailge tenet de rege Craumares . . . Heraldus comes tenuit?
Domesday, folio 157 a, col. 1.
5 ' Abbatia Prattellensis tenet de rege v hidas in Watelinton . . . JElfelmus liber
homo tenuit T. R. £.' Ibid, folio 157 a, col. 1.
244 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the vill of Taynton1, in Oxfordshire, given to it. Yet none of these
four are returned as holding any of the houses in Oxford in their pos-
session. It will, however, be noticed as a very singular coincidence that
a house in Oxford does belong to Taynton, and that it is entered as if
it was belonging to S. Edmunds. There certainly seems to be strong
negative evidence in the Cartulary of St. Edmund's Abbey against the
manor ever having been transferred to that abbey, and it must there-
fore be suspected that we have here an error on the part of the
compiler of the Survey, who has entered the wrong abbey in Domesday.
We next find a long list of Norman earls and barons, who had
come over with the Conqueror, holding in the same way mansions in
Oxford, apparently representing manors in Oxfordshire or the neigh-
bouring counties, but which, as had been the case with the episcopal
estates, had sometimes become separated. These earls and barons
take their places in the Domesday Survey as tenentes in capi/e, or
tenants in chief, that is, they hold their land direct from the crown 2.
It is very difficult to understand the circumstances which ruled the
distribution of the lands to the Norman nobles on the accession
of William. Some of the more favoured seem to have held manors
in half the counties of England. If we take the first on the list, the
Earl of Moretain, William's half-brother, we find that he has some
eight hundred manors, distributed throughout twenty counties, ranging
from Yorkshire to Sussex, and from Cornwall (nearly the whole of
which he possessed) to Norfolk. This is of course exceptional, and per-
haps he ranks the highest amongst the most favoured of the Norman
barons in this respect. But Hugh, Earl of Chester, seems to have held
nearly a hundred and fifty manors, distributed also over twenty coun-
ties; while Henry of Ferrars more than a hundred, distributed over four-
teen counties ; and Milo Crispin has over ninety, but confined to seven
counties, the greater part being in Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire.
The proportion of the Oxford mansions to the manors held in the
county by these Norman nobles is, as already said, often unequal.
The Earl of Mortain, though he has ten mansions, holds only two
manors in Oxfordshire, viz. ten hydes in Hornelie (possibly Horley,
three miles north-west of Banbury), which had been held by a certain
Tochi, and one hyde which the monks of St. Peter's, Westminster,
held of him, but of which the locality is not given 3.
1 • Eccksia S. Dionysii Parisii tenet de rege Tcigtone? Ibid, folio 157 a, col. 1.
2 See the list of those in Oxfordshire given on the facsimile page of the Domesday
Survey in this volume.
3 Domesday, folio 157 a, col. 2.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY, 245
Earl Hugh, however, has somewhat better reason for his seven
mansions, as he holds five manors in the county. Hugh de Abrincis,
i.e. of Avranches, had the earldom of Chester given to him by the
Conqueror in the year 1070, and though nearly forty manors had
been granted to him in the county of Chester (which he held in
domim'o, and not de rege), we find him as tenant in chief of several
manors in various other districts. In Berkshire two, in Bucking-
hamshire three, and in Oxfordshire five. In the last county he had
obtained Peritone (i.e. Pirton, north of Watlington), which had
belonged to Archbishop Stigand, of Canterbury; Westone (which
must be Weston, the adjoining parish; Tachelie (i.e. Tackley, to the
north of Woodstock), which Hugo, King Eadward's chamberlain, had
held ; Cercelle (which is most likely Churchill, near Chipping Norton),
and this Earl Harold had held ; and land in Ardulveslie (now Ardley,
north-west of Bicester) \
William, Earl of Evreux, had succeeded to his earldom in 1067,
and is recorded, together with his father, to have fought in the great
battle near Hastings. His rewards were not seemingly so great as
those of others, who perhaps had done less for William, as he was
only possessed of some seventeen manors, nine of which lay in
Berkshire and the remaining eight in Oxfordshire2. The lands he
acquired in the few cases where the previous holders' names are given
seem not to have belonged to persons known to history. One
mansion at Oxford it will be seen represents the whole.
Henry of Ferrieres 3 was either a richer man, and could purchase
more, or he was a greater favourite, and his manors, of which there
are over a hundred4, are so distributed that thirty-three are in
Leicestershire, twenty-two in Berkshire5, and seven in Oxfordshire6,
and yet his manors are represented by two houses only in Oxford.
1 Domesday, folio 157 a, col. 2. 2 Ibid.
3 In most documents the name is written de Ferrariis. There are one or two
villages in Normandy named Ferrieres ; probably he derived his title from that near
Bernai.
* Domesday, folio 157 b, col. 2.
5 Of the acquisition of two of his Berkshire manors (fol. 60 b, col. 1), Fivehide
(Fyfield) and Chingestune (Kingston Bagpuiz), we have a very interesting account
preserved by the compiler of the Abingdon Chronicle (Rolls, ed. vol. i. pp. 484
and 491). There had evidently been law proceedings respecting them between him
and Abingdon Abbey. On the ground that Godric sheriff of Berkshire holding
Fyfield, under Abingdon, and Turchill in the same way holding Kingston, had
both fallen while fighting in the great battle, the court held that the manors were
rightly confiscated, and Henry of Ferrieres gained the suit.
6 The following note occurs in one of the manors, namely that of ' Dene and
Celford (i.e. Dean in Spelsbury Parish and Salford near Chipping Norton):
246 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
"William Peverel also (who was an illegitimate son of the Conqueror)
seems to have been well favoured; when, in 1068, William erected
Nottingham Castle, he gave it into the charge of William Peverel.
He possessed nearly a hundred manors1, but not very widely dis-
tributed, nearly eighty of them being situated in Nottinghamshire and
Northamptonshire, and the remainder in Derbyshire, Leicestershire,
Beds, Berks, Bucks, and Oxon. In Buckinghamshire he held ten
manors; in Oxfordshire two, and in Berkshire one. His two
Oxfordshire manors were Claivelle and Amintone (Crowell and Em-
mington), both in the hundred of Lewknor, and not far from Thame.
His four mansions are therefore somewhat disproportionate, unless
they represent manors in Buckinghamshire as well.
Edward the Sheriff is named next as holding two mansions ; a
signature has already been noted ■ which might be thought to imply
that he was sheriff of Oxford, yet it is possibly the same as the
Edward who is elsewhere referred to in Domesday as Edward of
Salisbury 3, and this Edward was sheriff of Wilts. Under this latter
title 4 he appears to have possessed two manors in Oxfordshire out of
the fifty-seven he possessed in all. Forty of them were in Wiltshire, the
remainder being in Dorset, Somerset, Hants, Surrey, Middlesex, and
Hertfordshire 5. We know something of his history, and he must
have been rather a young man at this time, if it is the same who in
the twentieth year of Henry the First's reign (1120) served as
standard-bearer at the battle of Brdmule.
Ernulph, of Hesding (named possibly from Hesdin in Picardy, but
as no trace is found amongst the signatures of charters there, probably
' Hujus terrae v hidas tenet Hfenricus] de rege et iij hidas emit ab Eduino Vice-
comite,' Domesday, folio 157 b, col. 2. It opens up a curious enquiry how Eadwine
the sheriff was in a position to sell a part of the manor. Also what Eadwine
is meant. In 1050 Wulfwine was sheriff of Oxfordshire (see ante, p. 179), and
an Edward, according to the next entry but one on the Oxford list, seems to be
sheriff at the time of the Survey.
1 Domesday, folio 157 b, col. 2.
2 As a signature to the charter respecting Ensham, see ante, p. 242. The signa-
ture however does not mention the name of the county of which he was sheriff.
3 Edward of Salisbury was sheriff of Wiltshire, for in the Domesday Survey
(folio 69 a, col. 1) there is an entry of his profits as sheriff as follows : — ' Edwardus
vicecomes habet per annum de denariis quae pertinent ad vicecomitatum, 120
porcos et 32 bacones ; Frumenti 12 modios, et 8 sextarios, et tantundem brasii :
A venae 5 modios et 4 sextarios : Mellis 16 sextarios vel pro melle 16 solidos (this
gives us the price of honey then) ; Gallinas 480 ; Ova 1600 ; Caseos 100 ; Agnos
52 ; Vellera ovium 240; Bledi annonae 162 acras.'
4 Domesday, folio 160 a, col. 1.
5 Under Hertfordshire (folio 139 a, col. 2) the heading is 'Terra Edwardi Vice-
comitis ' ; but amongst the entries the form ' Edwardus Sarisberiensis occurs.'
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 247
from some place in Normandy the name of which is lost), was well
favoured, as nearly fifty manors were held by him, mostly in Wilt-
shire. In Oxfordshire he held three manors l, viz. B or tone (but
which of the three Bourtons has not been ascertained), Ludewelle
(Ledwell in Sandford St. Martin's parish), and Nortone (probably
Chipping Norton) ; and just as he held three manors in the shire,
so also he held three mansions in Oxford.
Berenger of Todeni 2 had but nine manors 3, but strangely dis-
tributed : two in Yorkshire, one in Lincolnshire, three in Nottingham-
shire, and three in Oxfordshire ; the latter being Brohtune (Broughton),
a part of Hornelie (i.e. Horley, already referred to as being held also
in part by the Earl of Mortain), and Bodico/e, all three lying in
the immediate neighbourhood of Banbury, and represented by one
mansion.
Milo Crispin 4, as has been noticed, had several manors, and mostly
in Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire, holding, as he did, over thirty
in each of those counties. He married Maud the daughter of Robert
D'Oilgi, who had married the daughter of Wigod of Wallingford, but
as the marriage must have taken place after the date of the Survey, he
could not have obtained any of his manors through his wife. He
possessed Gadintone (probably Goddintone) and Cestreione (Chester-
ton), both of which had belonged to Wigod of Wallingford ; Haselic
which had belonged to Queen Edith, and Witecerce (Whitchurch)
which had belonged to Leuric and Alwin : of his other manors
nothing is noted as to who held them in the time of King Eadward 5.
Amongst his Buckingham manors also appear one or two which had
belonged to Wigod of Wallingford6. His two mansions in Oxford
are scarcely representative of his property in the county.
Richard of Curci (who takes his name from Courcy sur Dive) 7 was
1 Domesday, folio 160 a, col. 1.
2 He seems to have come from Toeni, or, as it is now spelt, Tosny, near the bank
of the Seine, and in his domain or adjoining to it there arose in after years, to
the delight of Richard the First, one of the finest fortresses along the whole course
of that river, and which was hence known as the Chateau Gaillard. Orderic Vital
mentions Ralph de Toeni who was standard-bearer to William, and was at the
battle near Hastings. Later on his son Ralph played a part in history. There were
also three of the family named Roger of Toeni, the first of whom died before
William came over. Berenger of Toeni is not mentioned by Orderic Vital at all.
3 Domesday, folio 159 a, col. 2.
4 In 1084 he is referred to by the Abingdon chronicler as follows : ' Cum Miloni
de Walingaford cognomento Crispin.' Chron. Mon. Ab. ii. p. 12.
5 Domesday, folio 159 a, col. 2. 6 Domesday, folio 150 a. col. 1.
7 In the Department of Calvados, about ten miles N.E. of Falaise. Richard of
248 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
possessed of three manors only l, and those three in Oxfordshire, viz.
Neuham (probably Nuneham near Oxford) Secendene (i. e. Checkendon
beneath the Chilterns), and a hyde in Fdxcote (a hamlet of Idbury
near Burford); and these are fairly represented by three mansions.
When we come to Robert D'Oilgi (named probably from Ouilly le
Vicomte2) it will be observed that twelve mansions are entered under
his name as held by him in Oxford 3, and another forty-two houses
are entered elsewhere, where his name occurs amongst the tenants in
chief. There can be little question that the latter are wholly in addition
to the mansions enumerated in the Oxford list. As has already been
pointed out, besides being castellan or governor of Oxford, he had
married the daughter of Wigod of Wallingford, and had no doubt
acquired some of his father-in-law's manors as a dowry, and more still
at his death, since it would appear that they had not been confiscated
by the Conqueror. At the same time, but few evidences occur of this
in the Survey. For instance, amongst D'Oilgi's manors in Berkshire
only one seems to have been derived from his father-in-law.
He was possessed in all of some fifty manors, of which the greater
part were in Oxfordshire, the remainder being in the neighbourhood ;
that is, three in Northamptonshire, one in Warwickshire, two in Hert-
fordshire, one in Bedfordshire, six in Buckinghamshire, six in Berk-
shire, and three in Gloucestershire.
There are twenty-nine entries of his manors4 distributed throughout
Oxfordshire, and to some of these manors, directly or indirectly,
it is probable that the twelve mansions named in the Survey belonged.
It is different perhaps as regards the 'forty-two houses, as well
within as without the wall V These belonged wholly to the Holywell
manor, which must be considered to be both adjacent to, as well as
Courci, who held the Oxford mansions, assisted William Rufus against Robert de
Belesme, who in 1091 in return besieged his castle at Courci. Orderic Vital
(Lib. viii. 16) describes him as then grey-headed. He signs the charter quoted
ante, p. 242.
1 Domesday Survey, folio 159 a, col. I.
2 There are four places in Calvados of the name of Ouilly, viz. Ouilly-le-vicomte,
and Ouilly-du-Houlley, both near to Lisieux, and Ouilly-le-Basset, and Ouilly-le-
Tesson, both near to F^alaise. At the first of these, which lies three miles to the
north of Lisieux, there still exists a most curious little church of a date anterior to
the twelfth century, built up of Roman materials {Statistique Monumentale du
Calvados, 1867, v. p. 4). It is just possible it was due to the piety of Robert ; and
if so we have there the forerunner of the churches of St. George, St. Mary Magdalen,
St. Michael, and St. Peter at Oxford.
3 Domesday, folio 158 a, col. 1. 4 Domesday, folio 158, col. 1.
5 Domesday Survey under No xxviii. folio 158 a, cols. 1, 2, and 158 b, col. 1. See
ante, p. 224.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 249
partially within Oxford. It is true the description is obscure, and
the passage referring to his holding one manor, with the benefice
of S. Peter, seems to have been left imperfect in the process of tran-
scription. The mention of the mill, which is no doubt that still
bearing the name of Holywell Mill, and St. Peter's church, which, in
much later documents, is shown to be closely connected with Holy-
well *, seem to point distinctly to there being one manor of Holywell
to which both the paragraphs above quoted from Domesday refer,
though in the original they are separated by intervening paragraphs.
The explanation is that first the manors are described which Robert
D'Oilgi held in demesne, and next the series of manors or portions
which were leased to under-tenants.
It will be observed that in reference to these tenements in Oxford, the
term ' domos ' is used instead of mansiones ; but as already pointed out,
there is no practical difference in the terms : further, the word hospi-
tatas 2 is added, which, in this instance, can mean nothing more than
that the houses were let to tenants. It is not, however, without interest
to note that twenty-three men on the manor have gardens. These
' hortulV may reasonably be taken in the sense of market gardens,
and it is an exceptional instance of the reference to an industry in
Oxford at this time 3.
1 In the Hundred Rolls (vol. ii. p. 805). In the inquisition taken temp. Edw. I.
we find ' Dominus Bogo de Clare, rector ecclesiae Beati Petri orientalis Oxon . . .
tenet manerium de Halywelle ratione ecclesiae suae praedictae, de novo a burgo
Oxoniensi subtractum.' The advowsons of both St. Peter's and Holywell church
belong to Merton College at the present time.
2 The expression ' mansiones hospitatae? as has been shown in a previous page
(p. 234), occurs in the entry respecting Lincoln, where it appears to be applied
to the houses generally. The burgesses of Lewes are returned as having 39 man-
surae hospitatae et 20 inhospitatae (fol. 26 a, col. 1). The term is not confined to the
meaning of ' inhabited,' which is the obvious rendering, for the word is used in a
charter temp. Hen. III., in respect to a meadow, e.g. ' Exdono Gilberti filii Nigeli,
totum pratum tarn hospitatum quam non hospitatum, quod est sub habitaculo earun-
dem monialium.' (See Prior. S. Clementis juxta Eboracum, Dugdale, vol. iv. 325.)
(See Ducange also, sub voce ' hospes.') The false argument, however, adopted from
the incidental use of this word in the Survey of Oxford, to support the theory of the
existence of a University here at this time should not be quite passed over without
notice. Antony a Wood writes ' What those houses stiled " domos hospitatas" should
signify but hospitia, i.e. Inns or Receptacles for Scholars (for so hospitia, accord-
ing to commentators, is expounded), let those that are critics judge/ {History and
Antiquities of the University of Oxford, ed. 1792, vol. i. p. 133) Wood, before
giving to the words this sense, should have observed that while Oxford only
possessed 42, the city of Lincoln possessed 912 so described.
3 The other exceptions are Wulwi the fisherman and Swetman the moneyer : the
latter however, would perhaps be looked upon as a government official rather than
a tradesman. Of course there are the mills, each of which implies a miller.
250 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Robert D'Oilgi lias already been noticed somewhat fully in the his-
torical narrative given in the last chapter, as the founder of S. George's
in the Castle, and, by implication, of S. Mary Magdalen ; and here we
find another church connected with his name, namely, S. Peter's in
the East, and it is not unreasonable to suppose him to have been the
founder of this also \
It is very difficult to assign a definite position to this monument
amongst the historical monuments of Oxford. In the first place, the
church has been made to play a prominent part in the mythical story
of King Alfred's foundation, and the crypt called in, so to speak, as a
witness to the truth of the story of Grymbald having built himself a
tomb in which he had intended ' his bones should be laid 2 ;' and this
has tended to deter sober investigation into its real history. Though
the story of Grymbald having built the crypt be an invention, the
monument may be said to retain evidences, which seem to point to
the plan being of a period before D'Oilgi's time, and yet other
evidence seems to point to the structure being after his time ; and
hence there is some difficulty.
The plan of this crypt, as now visible, represents nothing very
extraordinary, and, by a casual visitor, it would be at once ascribed to
Henry the First's reign, but be admitted to be of a type of crypt
which wras continued later ; and as there appears to be no break
between the wall of the crypt and the wall of the chancel above,
which wall contains both structural and ornamental evidences of being
of the time of Stephen (if not of Henry the Second), the conclusion
would naturally be drawn that the crypt was probably of the latter
date. At the same time, the small doorways on either side and at the
western end would suggest that work of an earlier date had been
made use of. But the plan of the crypt as a whole, which was dis-
covered by the excavations made under the auspices of the Oxford
Architectural and Historical Society in 1863, is of a type which is
usually supposed to have ceased in the eleventh century in this
country, or at latest in Henry the First's reign.
The essential features of this type were, first, that the vault of the
crypt was raised some three or four feet above the level of the floor of
1 It will be noticed that the church holds two hydes of him ; and this looks rather
like an endowment on his part. Had the church already held the land the entry
would probably have been different. Of course it does not exclude the hypothesis
that there was a church already, that it had lost its original endowments, and that
D'Oilgi gave to it others ; but in the absence of any rebutting evidence the first is
by far the most reasonable hypothesis.
2 See ante, p. 47.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SUR VE Y. 25 1
the nave ; next, that there were descending steps from the nave both
on the north and south side into the crypt. In some cases moreover the
space now occupied in our cathedrals, and in the few parish churches
in which the choir is thus raised, by central steps leading up into the
choir, was left open, or at most covered by a grill or something of the
kind, through which a tomb or important shrine could be seen ;
this was an imitation, or rather a survival of, the early arrangement in
the Roman churches, in which this plan of a raised crypt had for
some rather obscure reason come to be called a ' Confessio.' There
are very few parish churches where any traces of this latter arrange-
ment are at all visible. At Wing, in Buckinghamshire, the very rude
crypt beneath the chancel, constructed of concrete rather than
masonry, exhibits traces of an opening of this kind ; by the alteration,
however, of level, coupled with either wanton destruction or decay,
the exact plan of the Confessio has been obscured. At Repton, in
Derbyshire, while the ninth century crypt shows a fine example of
masonry, the vaulted roof being supported upon twisted columns, the
western arrangement has been much obliterated; but sufficient remains
to show there had been a central communication with the church
above, by some sort of opening, for the faithful to see into the crypt
without necessarily descending the steps which led down into it. In
this church also the three arches at the western end remain, two of
which, one on either side, present the original arrangement of the steps
leading down into the crypt from the nave.
At S. Peter's Church there are the three western arches, two of
which are doorways, but now blocked up ; but behind each of them
a passage, some ten feet in length, exists leading to some steps of
which on either side some five or six remain, or have left traces in the
undisturbed gravel to show whence they had been removed. It must
have required some ten steps to reach to the level of the nave. These
doorways, with the remains of the bolt-holes for the bolts with which
the doors were provided, evidently belong to the original structure.
The central archway at the western end, now open, leads into a
small, low, rudely vaulted chamber, but it is doubtful if it presents
anything of the original character ; and whether or not it provided in
its first construction an opening to the nave, or whether central steps
were part of the original design, cannot now be ascertained1.
1 See Oxford Architectural and Historical Society's Report, May, 1863, vol. i.
p. 223. A good view of the crypt is given in Skelton's Oxonia Antiqua Restaurata,
1843, pi. 703, where it is represented flooded with water, which was frequently the
case.
252 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
With those data it is necessary to proceed somewhat cautiously; but,
taking into account various considerations, the following explanations
are suggested. The endowment of the church being held from
Robert D'Oylly's manor, as has been said, seems to point to the
building of the church being due to his bounty, or at least to his
permission, if not assistance ^s governor of Oxford, and therefore to
be associated with his name. The fact of an ancient arrangement
being adopted, is not of itself sufficient evidence to conclude that a
church already existed on the spot. No doubt at Canterbury, the
leading example for architectural history, Lanfranc, who succeeded to
his archbishopric in 1070, and who began his work soon after,
followed the old plan, though he appears to have built de novo1.
His work was going on at Canterbury at the same time that Robert
D'Oilgi's work was going on in Oxford, and therefore it is not surpris-
ing if the same plan in this respect was followed here. Something
of the same arrangement must have been followed at Rochester and
several other cathedrals rebuilding at the same time, but in all these
1 Since the arrangement which S. Peter's church offers (though no advantage
was taken of this recent restoration to render this arrangement visible) is so rare
and interesting, and since it affords so important a piece of evidence in the argu-
ment for this portion at least of the structure being of the time of Robert D'Oilgi,
it will be satisfactory perhaps here to introduce a short extract from the description
given by Gervase (printed in Twisden's Decern Scriptores, col. 1291, &c. and
ed. Rolls Series, 1879, vol. i. p. 8.) It must be premised however that Gervase,
who wrote circa 1 200, did not see the arrangement which he describes, but copies
that of Eadmer, the singer, who introduces incidentally a note upon the arrange-
ment of Canterbury in his Vita Atidoeni. ' This was the very church which had
been built by the Romans as Bede bears witness in his history, and which was duly
arranged in some parts in imitation of the church of the blessed Prince of the
Apostle Peter [at Rome] in which his holy relics are exalted by the veneration of
the whole world . . . [He then gives an account of the altars in the church of
Canterbury.] To reach these altars a certain crypt which the Romans call a
" confessionary " had to be ascended from the "choir of the singers" by several
steps. This crypt was constructed underneath, after the likeness of the confes-
sionary of S. Peter, the vault of which was raised so high, that it could only be
reached by many steps . . . and when Lanfranc came to Canterbury [1070] he found
the church which he had undertaken to rule was reduced to ashes ... As for the
church he set about to destroy it utterly and erect a more noble one . . . but before
the work began he commanded that the bodies of the Saints which were buried in
the eastern part of the church, should be removed to the western part ... to which I
Eadmer can bear witness for I was then a boy at school.' More cannot be quoted
without raising questions as to the details of the arrangement, and the object of this
note is only to show that the 'confessio' was the primitive arrangement; that
Lanfranc in his work, which was going on from 1070-77, followed it, as existing
remains testify, and therefore that it is not unlikely that Robert D'Oilgi (who founded
St. George in the Castle in 1074) followed such an arrangement. The church which,
after the great pattern church of Rome, was dedicated to St. Teter, would be more
likely to follow something of the same type, though on a very small scale.
D ESC RIP TION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVE Y. 253
cases, immediately the century turned, the old work seems to have
been thought unworthy, and was destroyed, or partially so, to make
way for new work of a better description, or on a more extensive
scale. Anselm, for instance, at Canterbury, so altered and changed
the work of Lanfranc, some forty years afterwards, that very little of
the old structure is now visible. The western wall of the crypt
remains as it was left by Lanfranc, and the doorways, with the steps
leading down from the aisles ; but the vaulting was raised by Anselm,
and though in all probability much of the old material was used up
again, the crypt must be said to belong to Anselm' s date.
Here in S. Peter's Church probably D'Oilgi's crypt was kept, and
whether the steps were still retained in use or not, the three western
arches were retained. The masonry of two more doorways, situated
in the northern and southern walls of the crypt respectively, and which
communicated by a newel staircase with the choir above, were probably
made use of again, but the walls, so far as can be ascertained, were
nevertheless wholly rebuilt. Even the doorways at the top of the
newel staircases seem to have been retained and rebuilt again into
the new wall, since they are similar in character to those below;
while some of the pillars, bases, and capitals were very probably used
up again, or others made, for the sake of uniformity, to be like them.
Work of this kind may be so carefully performed as to leave no trace
behind it by which to distinguish between the old and the new, and so
it is here. The masonry such as would be used in a crypt built in the
reign of Henry I. or of Stephen might be of exactly the same character
as the original masonry of the time of the Conqueror or of even
earlier date, since the distinction observable between the wide-jointed
and fine-jointed masonry is, as a rule, confined to work intended for
a more prominent position.
It may be asked, Why was the crypt rebuilt within fifty years or so
of its first erection ? The answer is probably the same as must be
given to the question of Anselm rebuilding Lanfranc's work, of which
we have such full and clear record. In his new work at Canterbury,
the crypt was certainly elevated by some two or three feet higher
than before, the line being plainly visible on its western wall. There
is little doubt also that the crypt was extended eastward, though
in this case, as in the case of Rochester and other cathedrals, the
crypt has in the thirteenth century been extended again further east-
ward, so that the line of the eastward termination, as it was in the
twelfth century, is wholly obliterated.
Now in S. Peter's the probabilities are that D'Oilgi's crypt was
254 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
not extended so far to the east as it is now, and also that it had an
apsidal termination, such as that which is shown on the plan of the
original crypt of S. George's in the Castle, erected, probably, only a
short time previously to S. Peter's. It is true that isolated instances
of rectangular terminations of crypt and chancel occur before the
twelfth century ; also, on the other hand, isolated instances of apsidal
terminations occur in this country, erected after the close of the
eleventh century, and are common enough on the continent; but the
rule is so general of apsidal terminations in the eleventh, and rect-
angular terminations in the twelfth, as to warrant the supposition that
the alterations were undertaken partly with the object of changing the
small apse into a tolerably capacious choir with the flat east end, such
as it has now according to the fashion of the time, and that the altera-
tion, and almost entire rebuilding of the crypt, with the exception of the
western wall, took place some fifty years or more after the original
building by Robert D'Oilgi, but with the plan and some of the
original details retained. This, on the whole, appears to be the best
explanation by which the several circumstances can be accounted for ;
so that the visitor, when standing in S. Peter's crypt and looking
westward, may be said to gaze upon a monument which carries him
back to the time of Robert D'Oilgi, as much as the tower of St. Michael's
Church, or that which rises from the Castle.
Another view would be that the crypt is entirely as Robert D'Oilgi
left it. It is, as regards masonry, an advance on the tower of the
Castle and St. Michael's, but the concrete vault (with the marks of the
boards remaining) is exactly what might have been expected at that
time ; while the ashlar work and the well-set arches, the capitals, the
columns, and the bases, would only go to show that a skilful master
of the works was employed, and skilful workmen under him, one who
had travelled and understood the style which was then coming in over
the whole of western Europe. And if the crypt be compared with
others erected during the last twenty years of the eleventh century,
and of which the date may be reasonably assigned, e.g. the original
part of Wulfstan's crypt at Worcester, or of Gundulf s at Rochester,
the argument from analogy would leave much to be said for the
theory. And so far as any absence of line of demarcation is concerned,
such though not visible on the outside, might be visible on the interior,
were it not obscured by the plaster with which the walls are covered.
Still, taken all into account, the hypothesis that some alteration took
place in Henry the First's reign is the one which would probably be
most generally accepted.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 255
Of Roger of Ivry, so named from a town on the river Eure1, mention
has already been made in connection with Robert D'Oilgi in the
foundation of S. George's in the Castle 2. It would appear they were
sworn companions, other instances of the kind being recorded. Roger
of Ivry was well favoured ; he had been Pincerna to the Duke of
Normandy, and seems to have held the same office here under the
King of England ; he possessed some forty manors which, like those
belonging to Robert D'Oilgi, were chiefly in Oxfordshire and the
immediate neighbourhood. Besides twenty-three in the county3, he
held one in Warwickshire, one in Huntingdonshire, seven in Bucking-
hamshire, four in Berkshire, and five in Gloucestershire. It would
almost seem as if they had been partners in their successes and in
their purchases. Like Robert D'Oilgi, his Oxfordshire manors, it will
be seen, were well represented by mansions in Oxford. Amongst the
manors under his name it will be observed he held of the king four
hydes in Walton (probably the whole manor) in the north of Oxford,
which reached down to the river, since it included a fishery of the value
of i6</. and 6 acres of meadow, and this manor he is returned as holding
in demesne. He also held the neighbouring manor of Ulfgarcoie
(Wolvercote), consisting of 5 hydes ; and this he had leased to a certain
1 Godefridus V In only one solitary case throughout all his manors is
there the slightest reference as to who held them in King Eadward's
time, which is unfortunate, as it would have been interesting to know
to whom the land adjoining Oxford on the North had belonged.
Whether the Rannulf Flammard or Flambard was the same who
under William Rufus was made Bishop of Durham (1099), and whose
infamous career is described by historians, may be open to question.
That he appears in Oxfordshire under the heading of Terra Canoni-
corum deOxeneford et Aliorum Clericorum^ implies perhaps that he was in
orders ; we find one with such a name also as a tenant in chief of some
three or four manors in Hampshire 6. That the solitary mansion in
1 In the department of Eure, marked on the map as Ivry-la-Bataille, some sixteen
miles S.E. of Evreux. Here Roger founded an abbey in 1071, portions of which
still exist. 2 See ante, p. 208.
3 Domesday, fol, 158 b, col. 1. 4 Ibid. fol. 159 a, col. 1.
5 Domesday, fol. 157a, col. 1 . The word Flanbard\% interlineated above ' Rannulf.'
Elsewhere, under LVIII. ' Terra Ministrorum Regis' (fol. 160 b, col. 1), a Rannulf
occurs as holding land at Ludewelle, but it would be rash to identify the two.
6 Domesday, fol. 49 a, col. 2. Here he is entered as Rannulfus, with the name
Flame interlineated, and he holds Funtelei, which had been held by a certain Turi
of Earl Godwine. Under the lands in the New Forest (folio 51a, col. 2) a Rannulf
Flanbart holds a hide in two manors and four acres in a third, the rest being
' in forest a!
256 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Oxford belonged to one or other of these manors is not improbable,
nor is it impossible that the owner was the same as the one of this
name who afterwards became Bishop. On the other hand it is difficult
to reconcile the data with the biographical notice of his life given in
Orderic Vital l.
Wido of Reinbodcurth 2 seems to have had only one manor in
Oxfordshire, namely Werocheslan 3 (i. e. Wroxton near Banbury), but
he had ten in Northamptonshire, and some sixteen distributed in
Cambridgeshire, Leicestershire, and Lincolnshire. Though with only
one manor in the county he yet had two mansions in Oxford.
Walter Gifard, lord of Longueville, afterwards Earl of Buckingham,
was one of the more fortunate of holders of manors, his total reaching
to nearly a hundred, of which he held ten in Oxfordshire 4 and nearly
fifty in Buckinghamshire. These are sufficient to account for his
having so many as seventeen mansions in Oxford. It is added that the
predecessor of Walter had one, of the gift of King Eadward ex VIII to
virg* quae consueiudinariae erant T R E. There is nothing amongst
the entries of the lands of Wralter which in any way connects any of
his manors with Oxford ; at the same time the eight virgae being named,
if the interpretation be correct 5, affords an example of the amount of
ground belonging to a single house, i. e. the extent of the plot of ground
in which the house stood.
1 He died it 28. See a summary of the evidence given in Professor E. A. Free-
man's Reign of William Rnfus, 1882, vol. ii. p. 551.
2 The name is found spelt in the following ways in the course of the Domesday
Survey : Rainbuedcurt, Reinbuedcurt, Reinbuedcurth, Reinbodcurth, Reinbecurt,
and Renbudcurt. No such place has been observed in Normandy. There is a
Rembodcourt in the Department of the Meuse, and another in that of the Meurthe.
3 Domesday, folio 159 b, col. 2.
* Domesday, fol. 157 b, col. 1.
5 It could not mean that the house stood in eight virgates, though the form virgf
seems to stand for virgata, of which it is clear four went to the hyde, and as all
Oxford (putting it at about ninety acres) would be included in a single hyde, it is
impossible that such an extent of land within Oxford could belong to a single
house. It might be thought that the gift consisted of the eight virgates elsewhere
in the county, and the house in Oxford belonged to it : but throughout Walter
Gifard's manors there does not seem to be one of two hydes. Or, again, it might
be thought the house was assessed at the equivalent of eight virgates of land, but,
compared with the 172 houses at Dorchester assessed at ten hydes, this would be
excessive. (Folio 75 a, col. 1.) It has therefore been concluded that, although the
word is written precisely in the same way as where it means virgate, it may mean
only a virga, i. e. a rod, or pole. At the present time such measures about 30 square
yards, and the eight would measure 240 square yards, i. e. a moderately sized garden ;
but there are no means of arriving at any definite measurement for the virga at that
time.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 257
Next appear two mansions which are entered as belonging respec-
tively to the two manors of Hampton and Bletchingdon. The
names may possibly be those of the two tenants resident in them, and
they may be Englishmen. The name Gernio is found amongst the
King's thanes as holding ten hydes of the King in Hamptun \ and here
therefore is another instance of a house belonging to a manor. In the
time of King Eadward the ten hydes seem to have been divided up
into five small manors.
The son of Manasses might be thought to be an early instance of
a Jew at Oxford ; it must be borne in mind however that Old Testa-
ment names were often borne by Christians 2. At the same time there
is just a reason for a slight suspicion that this was a Jew. For in
the entry under the Terra Ministrorum regis, to the effect that Alwi
the Sheriff holds of the King two hydes and a half in Blicestone
(Bletchingdon), it is added, ' This land Manasses bought of him without
the king's licence V This statement is suggestive of the land being
pledged to Manasses, or at least of some reason for his not having
purchased the land in the usual way. However the surveyors omit all
reference to Alwi, and insert the son of Manasses as the owner, but
with the qualification that the house belongs to the manor.
This completes the list of tenentes in capite holding Oxford man-
sions. In spite of the disproportion in several instances the list of
the holders of these mansions may fairly be said to represent the chief
holders of the manors in the county of Oxford and its neighbourhood.
There are however certain tenants in chief in the county who might
have been expected to have held mansions who do not do so; e.g. Robert
of Stratford with nine manors ; Geoffrey of Mandevile, and Walter Fitz-
Poyntz, each with three ; Gilbert of Ghent, Richard Puingiant, Alfred,
the nephew of Wigod, the Countess Judith (widow of Earl Waltheof)
and Roger of Ivry's wife, each with two; and several others with
single manors belonging to them ; but such exceptions, bearing in mind
the chances of the separation, and the evident breaking up of manors
which had gone on during the twenty years of the Conqueror's rule, do
not seriously militate against the view here taken.
1 Domesday, folio 160 b, col. 2, Hampton is also mentioned under the land of
Roger of Ivry (158 b, col. 2). The whole manor seems afterwards to have been
divided into Hampton Gay and Hampton Poyle.
2 At this very time the Archbishop of Rheims was named Manasses. His father
was named Manasses before him, and his next successor but one to the see, viz. in
1096, was named Manasses. In the tenth century a Bishop of Aix was named
Israel. At Exeter the praepositus Canonicorum Sancti Andreae was named Isaac
(Domesday, vol. ii.fol. 71).
?' Domesday, fol. i6ob, col. 2.
s
358 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD,
A paragraph is here inserted in the Survey, that all the above-written
mansions are held free because they repair the wall, but the exact force
of the words is not very clear. They probably paid geld, but they
were held in capitc from the king, free on the condition named.
We then have a somewhat more important list of names, for it
may be presumed that the majority actually represent the inhabitants
of the town, whereas, in the case of those which have preceded them,
there is no reason to suppose that any one except Robert D'Oilgi, and
possibly his friend the co-founder of the college in the Castle, Roger
of Ivry, ever set foot in Oxford.
The first entry we have amongst them is an interesting one, namely,
' The Priests of S. Michael's.' There can be little or no doubt that
this is S. Michael's at North Gate, of which the tower remains to this
day, similar in many respects to that of the castle, which we are prac-
tically sure that Robert D'Oilgi erected. Had it not been for this entry,
showing that there were priests attached to the church of S. Michael
at this early date, it might have been left an open question whether,
after all, the tower was not wholly a military work, and not in any way
connected with the churches which the Abingdon Abbey Chronicle
says that Robert D'Oilgi ' repaired.' But when we find priests serving
S. Michael's, and when we learn from the original record that even within
the precincts of the castle he erected a church with a college of priests,
the inferences are very strong that S. Michael's priests were practically
endowed with their houses by Robert D'Oilgi, and that he certainly
restored, if he did not erect, the church of S. Michael's at North Gate.
The tower is an interesting one from many points of view. It is
intimately associated with the early history of Oxford, inasmuch as it
is one of the very few remnants existing of work which was standing
as visible to the inhabitants of Oxford at the time the Domesday
Survey was compiled as it is to the inhabitants of Oxford now ; again,
it is interesting as an example of military architecture of that period,
of which the examples are so few and far between, not only in this
country, but on the continent also ; it is interesting, too, perhaps,
from the fact of it serving a double purpose, namely, that of protecting
the city and yet connected with a church : lastly, it is interesting from
a purely architectural point of view.
It will not be out of place here, perhaps, to say a few words on
some of these points. On the evidence for the history of the building
and the association with Robert D'Oilgi's name, sufficient perhaps
has been already said; and that it guarded the north gate, the way
into Oxford mostly requiring protection against the enemy, is suffi-
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 259
ciently proved from the line of wall and ditch, as well as from the
name which the church received later on, viz. St. Michael's at North
Gate, to distinguish it from a little chapel which seems to have been
erected at a later period near the south gate of Oxford *.
But while the appearance is much more like that of a church tower
than the tower of the castle, there is a feature which is especially worthy
of attention, namely, a small round-headed doorway, about five feet
high, and little more than two feet wide, which exists at the north side
of the tower, at twenty-seven feet from the ground. It is hidden on the
exterior by the chimneys of the house built against it, and so is probably
entirely overlooked by most visitors ; but it is well seen and readily
accessible from the interior, and has the jambs and each abacus
complete. The use of this there can be but little doubt is the same
as that of the arches, now blocked up with masonry, at the very
top of the castle tower, some sixty feet from the surface of the
ground, and which have already been referred to as being constructed
for the purpose of giving access to the ' hourdes ' or wooden galleries
which projected from the wall2. The reason for the gallery in
S. Michael's tower being on a much lower level than that in the castle
tower, was that it might guard the approach to the gateway adjoining,
while in the castle the tower had to command the river and a much
more extended line.
It is difficult at this distant date, and after so many alterations have
taken place, to decide where the wall or rampart joined the tower.
Following the ordinary rule of fortification, it would abut on the eastern
side, but leaving the tower slightly projecting on the north.
On the south side, however, the masonry shows that there had been
a building of some kind abutting against the tower, and, still visible
in the masonry, there are marks of an original doorway, the base
of which would have been about twelve feet from the level of the
ground. Also, by taking into account the line of the old ditch found
during the recent excavations in the yard of the Ship Inn, and also
1 In reference to S. Michael's Church and Chapel at the north and south gate
respectively, as also to there being a S. Peter's Church in the eastern part of Oxford
and another in the west, there is a Latin distich as follows : —
' Invigilat porta australi boreaeque Michael
Exortum solem Petrus regit atque cadentem.'
'At North-gate and at South-gate too S. Michael guards the way,
While o'er the east and o'er the west S. Peter holds his sway.'
The distich is probably not earlier than the fourteenth or fifteenth century, but the
first occurrence has not been definitely traced.
a See ante, p. 210.
S 2
260 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the line of the wall on the west, it must be admitted that there is
some reason to suppose the tower wholly projected from the north
side of the rampart, and that the rampart was continued along the
south side of the tower, and that the doorway at twelve feet from the
ground opened upon this rampart. In time of siege the soldiers would
be able to pass from the rampart into the tower, which was no doubt
provided on the interior with wooden staircases, and so reach the
projecting ' hourd ' on the north side, whence, if the suggested plan
is correct, they would command the ditch on the right, and the road-
way in front of the gate on the left.
The traces of one more original doorway should be observed,
namely, on the west side, and level with the street. From this door-
way access would be gained from the road into the basement storey of
the tower. But whether the wall abutted against the eastern side of
the tower, or was carried along under the southern side, a great
difficulty arises in fixing upon the site of the church. In the eleventh
century a church tower wras, as a rule, either central or at the west end,
and when the latter was the case, the tower arch, opening into the
church, was an important feature, and generally bore distinctive marks
of the Romanesque style. Here there is no trace of any such arch,
but a fourteenth century arch, which, so far as can be judged, does not
take the place of any pre-existing arch of such a size as would have
existed had the church occupied the eastern end. In other words, the
evidence points to the tower not having been a western tower ; and it
could not have been a central tower, but to being a detached tower,
such as the tower was in the castle ; and though possibly provided
with bells, and having much more of the appearance of a church tower
than its companion, still it was not part and parcel of the church which
stood at the north gate, such as it is now.
On looking at the plan it will be at once seen that the wall has been
extended on the north so as to include the church ; but the precise
time when this was done it is difficult to determine. It may be con-
jectured however that the last extension was in the fifteenth century,
for the wall (and opportunity was given recently of examining it to the
foundations) was found to be scarcely two feet thick, while the main
city wall, as seen at the end of Turl Street, was close upon nine feet
in thickness.
The existing tower windows, it will be observed, present what are
called mid-wall shafts, of the type which occur at Jarrow, Monkwear-
mouth, and in other early architectural examples. In the cases named
they were probably the distinguishing feature which made the venerable
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDAY SURVEY. 261
Bede speak of those buildings as being erected more Romano^. Truly-
Romanesque before the style had developed into Norman, they stand
as important landmarks in the history of architecture ; for while they
were erected under the superintendence of the Norman Constabularius
who came over with the Conqueror, yet they were not more Norman
in style than buildings which had been erected for centuries previously
in the country. They point to the fact that although our intercourse
with Normandy accelerated, and possibly in a measure influenced the
development of our national style of architecture, we did not import
that style from Normandy. It is dangerous, with the few remains we
possess, and still fewer records which directly interpret the history of
those remains, to compare the tower of S. Michael's with other exist-
ing towers, and the architectural details of the same with those of
other buildings, but it may be said to represent the architecture of
the close of the eleventh century, before the long-and-short work at the
angles, with the rest built of rubble, gave way to the more expensive
but more lasting mode of building with surface ashlar masonry
throughout ; also before the plain pierced arch with a mid-wall shaft
gave way to the splayed Norman window or to arches with orders
duly recessed, such as eventually developed into the rich Gothic work
with their series of mouldings. And further, it is to be noticed that
the mid-wall shafts of S. Michael's are in the most perfect state of pre-
servation, inasmuch as regards three of the windows they have only
been exposed during the last few years 2.
The next entry in the Survey relates to the fifteen mansions held
by the Canons of S. Frideswide. These mansions again were probably
part of the endowment of the monastery in Oxford, either given by
wealthy residents or possibly built by the community on land which
they had acquired. Houses were not unfrequently given on the con-
dition that for the rest of the donor's life a ' corrody/ that is, sufficient
maintenance, and perhaps an annual sum of money, should be secured
to him by the monastery ; and it is possible that some of the tenements
of S. Frideswide had been already obtained in this way, as the
1 Beda, Hist. Eccl. lib. v. cap. 21.
2 About ten years since, partly with a view of lightening the weight of the tower,
as it was, in spite of the iron clamps, in a somewhat dangerous condition, and
partly with a view of improving the effect, the parish proposed to open the
windows, which had been long blocked up. To the satisfaction of every one, the
mid-wall shafts were found perfect. This had not been anticipated, and can only
be explained from the circumstance of the abacus in each case having been broken
by the pressure of the superincumbent mass, in which state each was found, and
therefore probably soon after their erection the windows were walled up to prevent
further giving way of the masonry above them.
262 THE EARLY HISTORY OE OXFORD.
documents show that many were so obtained after the eleventh
century.
But S. Frideswide's, as has been already said, does not appear to
have been prosperous. We find no parish church in Oxford at this
time which there is any reason to suppose had been built under its
auspices or in any way belonged to it, and the property in Oxford-
shire was still exceedingly small compared with that of other existing
monasteries, or with that which it acquired in Henry the First's
reign. As to the church itself, not a vestige exists of the old work,
the whole having been rebuilt, or at least been begun to be rebuilt,
under Prior Guimond at the beginning of the next century1.
In the Domesday Survey all that we find is under the heading ' No.
xiv. The Land of the Canons of Oxford and of other Clerks' It runs
as follows : —
1 The Canons of S. Frideswide hold 4 hydes of the King near
Oxford. They held it in King Edward's Time. The land five Caru-
cates. There 18 villani have five ploughs and 105 acres of meadow,
and eight acres of spinney. It was and is worth 40J. This land never
paid tax ; neither does it belong, nor did it belong to any hundred.
1 Siward holds of these same Canons 2 hides in Codes/aiu. Land for
two ploughs, which are there now. It was and is worth 40J. It
belonged and does belong to the Church V
As to the four hydes near Oxford, it is dangerous to assign to them
any definite place. Indeed it is not clear that it includes the precincts
of the nunnery. It has already been suggested that it does not neces-
sarily follow that the land was all in one part, and might possibly
include some on the western side of Oxford at Binsey. At the same
time it will not be overlooked that three hydes adjoining to the eastern
side of Oxford are expressly referred to in the charter of King
Ethelred granted a.d. 10043, namely, a piece of land on the north
bank of the Thames, stretching from the Cherwell on the west, to
1 The site is of course the same, or rather nearly so. It will be remembered
that the author of the life of S. Frideswide speaks of the tomb of that saint having
been moved. Whether he had any evidence for saying it was moved in the time of
King Athelred may be doubted. See ante, p. 101.
2 The remaining entries under the same heading refer to the holding of a certain
Osmund the priest, of land at Chertclintonc (Kirtlington); of Brun, a priest, of
land in Cadeiucll (qy. Adwell) ; of Edward, also probably a priest, the place of
whose holding is not named ; and of Kannulf Elambard, of land in Middleton
(perhaps Middleton Stoney), and who has been already referred to as probably
first a clerk and afterwards a Bishop. See ante, p. 255. Appendix A, § 99.
3 See ante, p. 143.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 263
Iffley on the east, and bounded by Bullingdon and Cowley on the
north1.
The land which they held on the north of Oxford, known as Cutslow,
and which also was part of the grant of King iEthelred, it will be
seen, they had leased to a certain Siward. This is not an uncommon
name amongst the tenants in the time of King Edward, and occurs in
several counties. But in Oxfordshire there is an entry under the
King's thanes2 respecting a certain Siwardus Venator, i.e. the king's
'hunter,' who holds from the king 2\ hydes at Cedelintone (i.e. Kid-
lington). The record adds, ' This Siward held it freely in the time of
King Edward. Probably from his abilities as a huntsman he was
allowed to retain his land, but de rege and not libere as before, and it is
clear that he found it convenient to farm the neighbouring land of
the Canons of S. Frideswide in the adjoining manor of Cutslow.'
The land however at Cutslow3 held by S. Frideswide had not in-
creased in value. It had belonged to S. Frideswide's before the
Conquest, and it belonged to it now ; in other words, the conduct of
the occupants of the monastery or of its lands had given no excuse to
the Conqueror to despoil them of their property4.
We now come to the names of the tenants, who may be for the
most part considered to be actually occupiers of the houses in Oxford,
for it will be observed that out of the thirty-eight thirty-two represent
occupiers of a single house. The names may be said to be all
English names5, but we are met by the circumstance that they are
1 The question as to the extent of these lands can only be discussed by taking
into account the confirmation charters of the next century.
2 LVIII. Terra Ricardi et aliorum ministrorum Regis. Domesday, fol. 160 b,
col. 2.
3 The following is an instance of the obscurity in the entries in the Domesday
Survey arising from their terseness. Though we find Siward holding 2 hydes from
S. Frideswide's in Cutslow, we find later on (fol. 159 a) under XXIX. Terra
Rogeri de Iveri, 'Aluredus Clericus tenet de R[ogerio] Codeslave! There are
there three hydes, &c. It must be assumed that these three hydes held by the
* clerk ' from Roger of Ivry are distinct from the two hydes held by the ' huntsman '
from the Canons of St. Frideswide's ; and we must infer that the whole manor of
Cutslow, represented at the present day only by a few farm buildings, consisted of
five hydes. The value of Roger of Ivry's three hydes had increased from three
pounds to four pounds. The two hydes belonging to St. Frideswide's were origin-
ally valued at two pounds, and are declared to be of the same still. However
much is left to conjecture ; very few words more would have made all clear.
4 This circumstance ought to have suggested itself to Thierry, when he describes
the action of the monks of S. Frideswide's at the siege of Oxford. See ante,
note 2, p. 195.
5 William perhaps might be taken as an exception, but whether or not English-
men by birth, there were several Williams in the country in the time of Edward
the Confessor.
264 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
given as a rule, unfortunately, without any designation, and further,
they are names of tolerably frequent occurrence in various parts of the
country, so that there is very little means of identifying the owners
with others bearing the same name. Coleman, the first of the series,
held three mansions, and is referred to as being dead, other occupiers
presumably having been found for his houses j it is a name not un-
frequent in the neighbourhood ; he may, perhaps, be identified with one
of the original holders of the six hydes at Ccstilone (Chesterton), in
Oxfordshire, which were now held from the king by Aluric, and which
Coleman and Azor had once held1 ; or with one of those of Sewe//e(?)
in Berkshire, which had been confiscated to the Earl of Evreux, but
which Coleman and Brictward had held of King Eadward 2. Some
little time after, that is, early in Henry the First's reign, one of the
houses in question was purchased by Abbot Faritius of Abingdon. The
following is the entry in the chronicle of that abbey, in reference to the
revenue being set aside for, the use of the occupation of the infirmary
there, and though as to date it belongs to the next century, the
passage so directly concerns the houses referred to in the Survey that
it must be given here.
' Since the brethren who were sick, and who had been bled were
without fire, the same Abbot Faritius with the consent of the
whole chapter granted all the rents of the undermentioned mansiones
which he himself had bought in Oxford, so far that when it was
needed there should be a fire supplied to the Infirmary, and he granted
this for the salvation of his own soul, and out of compassion on the
sick ; and whoever shall render this of none effect let him be anathema.
These are those mansiones with their rents : —
The land of Wlfwi the fisherman, five shillings and eight pence.
The land of Ruald, five shillings and two pence.
The land of Derman the Priest, seven shillings and two pence.
The land of Coleman, eight shillings.
The land of Eadwin the Moneyer and his brother, five shillings.
And whosoever shall take away this benefit from the sick, let him be
a stranger to God, and an exile from his kingdom for ever V
The Abbot Faritius had also purchased other houses in Oxford.
One of Roger Maledoctus yielding fifteen shillings, and one of Peter,
who had been formerly sheriff (vice comes), of nine shillings ; and one of
Derman, of three shillings4.
1 Domesday, folio 161 a, col. 1. ■ Ibid, folio 60 a. col 1.
3 Chron. de Monasterii de Abingdon, Rolls Series, vol. ii. p. 154. Appendix A,
§ 100.
4 Chron. A/on. Ab. vol. ii. p. 153. The exact date cannot be determined, but
it was before the death of Abbot faritius in 1 1 1 7. [bid. p. 41.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SVRVE Y. 265
It will be seen that the name of Coleman appears in this list,
and others will be referred to hereafter ; although the term * terra ' is
used, it included the mansions, as the text of the charter states,
and the heading of the list and the value of rents received prove.
It will be observed that the property, which in the Domesday Survey
was assumed to pay three shillings and eight pence, was producing to
the abbey a rental of eight shillings.
Next in the list we find a certain William, a name which is some-
times found as that of the holder of lands in the time of King
Eadward, but more frequently as holding property qua undertenant in
the Conqueror's reign. In a very large number of cases we find a
surname added, or its equivalent, e.g. Willelmus filius Azor ;
Willelmus Diaconus, &c. If, however, we attempt to determine who
this William was, we are met with many difficulties. That there was
a William of Oxford is clear, a man of some note, and apparently at
one time the sheriff of Oxfordshire. Amongst the charters granted by
Henry the First respecting certain demesne lands at Abingdon there
are two which are addressed to William of Oxford and one addressed
to W. Vicecomiti de Oxenford1. But it would be too much to say that
the William whom we find here holding a single house in Oxford
was the same man, though it is not impossible ; for the same William
who was afterwards made sheriff was very likely the William who
appears as undertenant of three hydes at Thame (Sawold holding
four, and he held also houses in Oxford), of three hydes at Middleton,
and of five hydes at Banbury, all being held under the Bishop of
Lincoln ; of two hydes at Hansitone (Hensington, near Woodstock),
and three hydes at Rowsham, under Roger of Ivry ; also twelve hydes
in Chestertone, eight more hydes in Hensington, and three hydes in
Advella (Adwell, near Watlington), all under Milo Crispin. There is
also a Willelmus, a subtenant in Berkshire, who holds some seventeen
hydes at different places under Milo Crispin, and therefore probably
the same, and some six or eight under others 2. This, on the one hand,
1 Chron. Mon. Ab. Rolls Series, vol. ii. pp. 86 and 87. Both charters are dated
• in Natale Domini ' at Westminster, but the year is not given. There is some
reason however to think it was Christmas Day, 1102. For the charter (ibid. p. 80)
no material is given to fix the date, but it was probably about the same year.
2 There were several tenants named William who held land in the neighbour-
hood ; for the name after the Conquest became exceedingly common. For in-
stance, in the Abingdon charters we find, besides those of that name holding
offices in the abbey, there was William the son of Anskill, another the son of
Ermenold of Oxford, another the son of Abbot Rainold of Abingdon, another the
son of Turold, and another the nephew of Earl Hugh. All were living in Henry I's
reign, and some had been benefactors to Abingdon.
266 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
may reasonably be the holder of a house in Oxford, and on the other
may reasonably have been thought worthy of the appointment of sheriff.
The name of Spracheling does not occur elsewhere, while Wulwi,
the fisherman's house, has already been noted amongst those afterwards
bought by Abbot Faritius. Alwin is not an uncommon name ; but in
this case it is highly probable that the holder of five mansions in Oxford
was the holder, in the time of King Eadward, of several mansions in
the county, and that they had for some reason been confiscated, and
perhaps the five houses were all he had saved from the wreck. An
Alwin had, together with Algar, held Combe, near Woodstock, now in
the hands of the Bishop of Bayeux ; Amintone (Emmington, near
Thame), now in the hands of Walter Gifard ; Whitchurch, now in the
hands of Milo Crispin ; and together with Sawold, land in Alwoldesberie
(? Albury). Also an Alwi who was sheriff held land at Bletching-
don \ It will be observed that there are other separate entries of
an Alwin, one holding a house which was entered as void, another
holding a house which appears to pay nothing (the name being
written Alwi), and one who does not pay because his house repairs
the wall, and one a priest (whose house also pays nothing). How far
any or all of the four last are to be identified with each other or with
the Alwin who holds the five mansions it is impossible to say, but
from the irregular manner in which the Survey is compiled, the repeti-
tion of the name does not necessarily involve there being five different
persons of the same name in Oxford.
Edric is a common name amongst the tenants in the time of King
Eadward in Essex, Norfolk, and Suffolk, but this name does not
occur in Oxfordshire. It is, however, found in Berkshire, as holding
Sparsholt, and Stanford in the Vale, in the time of King Eadward 2.
Under Sparsholt there is an interesting reference made to Edric's son
being a monk of Abingdon, and in one of the Abingdon charters,
relating to land in Oxfordshire, this Edric is referred to as the ' homo '
of Droco of Andelys s.
Harding appears to be a name unknown in Oxfordshire in the time
of King Eadward, though one at that time held some amount of
property in Wiltshire and Leicestershire. We hear, however, of one
of his houses in a singular manner. The toll of a hundred herrings
1 See ante, p. 257. It is not stated of what county he was sheriff. By implica-
tion it would be Oxfordshire.
2 Domesday, fol. 59 a, col. 2, fol. 61 a, col. 1.
3 Chron. A/on. Ab. Rolls Series, vol. ii. p. 68 ; and this Droco, who must have
been a neighbour of the Poeni family on the Seine (see ante p. 247 note), seems to
have been a benefactor to S. George's in the Castle ; Chron. A/on. Ab. p. 143.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY. 26 J
being the customary payment annually from the Oxford boats for using
the Abingdon water in their way down the Thames, has been already
referred to *. It seems disputes occurred, though the custom had been
already confirmed by Henry I.; writs were issued to his sheriffs of Berk-
shire and Oxfordshire in in I, and, to follow the words of the chronicler,
1 pleadings respecting this matter were instituted in the said city of
Oxford, in the house of Harding the priest, and by the common decree
of the authorities (majorum) of the same place it was adjudged in
favour of the church of Abingdon V
We learn from this that there had been a Harding at Oxford who
was a priest, and further, that one of the houses which still bore his
name was of sufficient importance for a court to be held in it. And
more than this, his name has already appeared as a benefactor to
Ensham Abbey, apparently in connection with St. Ebbe's Church ; for
one of the charters, dated 1109, recites, 'that Harding, of Oxford,
had given two houses there, one within and one without the wall;
and that he had gone to Jerusalem, and there died 3. Whether these
two or either of them are to be identified with the Harding, who, with
Leveva, had nine houses, may perhaps be doubtful.
No documents exist associating the name of Leveva with Harding.
Later on it will be observed that a certain Leveva had a single house
separately which paid ten pence, in the time of King Eadward, but was
now void. The name occurs not unfrequently, though not in Oxford-
shire. At Wallingford Leveva held a haga valued at two pence,
while at Reading the church which had been given to Battle Abbey
had formerly been held by Leveva an Abbess 4. Denchworth also,
which Robert of Stratford had obtained, had been held by Leveva,
quaedam libera femina. It may be added, however, that the name also
occurs as if it were that of a man ; e. g. in Bedfordshire we find Leveva
Homo Regis Edwardu
The form Ailric appears in several counties both before and after
1 See ante, p. 214.
2 Chron. Mon. Ab. vol. ii. p. 119. 3 See ante, p. 243.
4 It has been imagined by the Reading historians that the foundation of which
Leveva was abbess was in that town. There was a religious foundation of some
kind there, which the original charter of Henry I. refers to, in conjunction with
Cholsey and Leominster, as having been destroyed by the Danes. But there are no
grounds for saying that it was a nunnery, nor is it very likely, if destroyed in or
about 1006, a house would be returned in 1086 as having belonged to its abbess.
It was much more likely that the name mentioned in connection with Battle Abbey
refers to Leveva the abbess of Shaftesbury, who is so returned in the time of King
Eadward. It does not follow necessarily that the religious house at Shaftesbury
held it, for the abbess might have held it in her own personal right.
-6cS THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the Conquest, i.e. amongst those -who held lands in King Eadward's
time, and those who appear as undertenants in William's time after the
land was confiscated, but not in Oxfordshire. There was, however,
an Alric in Oxfordshire, who together with Alnod held the manor of
Celeford (Chalford, near Aston Rowant), which afterwards fell to
Henry of Ferrieres. Besides this form of the name, there is Elric,
tolerably frequent, and closely allied to it is Aluric, which is more
frequent still.
Two houses belonging to a Derman have already been noticed
amongst those which Faritius bought for Abingdon Abbey some few
years after the date of the Survey ; and we gather from the note that
one of these Dermans, like Harding, was a priest, his house paying
seven shillings and twopence ; the house of the other paying only three
shillings1. And it will be observed that the name of Derman occurs
later on in the Domesday list associated with a certain Brictred in the
possession of another house, and so the two houses may perhaps
represent the purchases made by the Abbot Faritius. The name
Brictred occurs only once in the Domesday Survey, and then as a
thane of Earl Eadwine in Worcestershire, though the name Brictric
is very frequent and occurs in most counties.
We then have a ' Segrim,' and the Survey distinctly refers to 'another
Segrim,' and a little further on a third of this name holds three houses.
Although the form Segrim is not often found, the name Sagrim is
common enough in some counties, but not in Oxfordshire. The
name of Smewin occurs in Somerset, and Goldwin occurs in Sussex
in the time of King Eadward, but they do not appear anywhere as
undertenants, except as holding the houses in Oxford. As to Eddid,
it is impossible to suggest anything, for not only are the entries in
the Domesday Survey of the name of the Queen Eddid very frequent,
but also many other persons are so called ; the forms too of this name
are so varied that it is difficult always to recognize it. To go no further
than Domesday, we find the forms Edded, Eddeda, Eddeva, Eddeve,
Eddida, Eddied, Eddiet, Eddiva, Eddive, Edeva, Edid, Edied, Ediet,
and Ediva, and they seem to be promiscuously used for perhaps as
many individuals as there are forms of the name.
We then have a Swetman, but there are three others of that name,
only one of whom is distinguishable, namely, the Moneyer. The
name is rare, both as a tenant in Eadward's Time, and as an under-
tenant at the time of the Survey. The mention of a moneyer, however,
is interesting, as affording documentary evidence that there was one
1 See ante, p. 264.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 369
established at Oxford plying his business as early as the Conqueror's
reign ; but the evidence of coins themselves, which have been dis-
covered, carries the history of coinage at Oxford several reigns back,
and the total number supposed to have been struck at Oxford make so
considerable a series, that the subject deserves separate treatment.
Without trespassing however upon such, it may be said that amongst
the specimens in existence there is one preserved in the British
Museum, bearing a king's head, full-faced, crowned, which is ascribed
to William II., and on the reverse is spetman on oxi1.
Sewi is a name rarely found. Alveva, on the other hand, is very
common. It will be remembered that Alveva was the wife of Earl iElfgar
and mother of Earl Morkere, and her name occurs in the Survey so
distinguished, while there are several others bearing the name. Pos-
sibly the lady named in the Oxford list had been the tenant of Am-
brosden in King Eadward's time, as that is the only place where the
name occurs in Oxfordshire. Alward is found as a tenant at Dench-
worth and Shottesbrook in Berkshire, and a sub-tenant under Robert
D'Oilgi at Str atone in Oxfordshire (i.e. Stratton Audley, near Bicester) 2.
Derewen has not been met with elsewhere, but the name Leuric is
found very frequently as a tenant in King Eadward's time, and
occasionally as an undertenant in William's time ; but of the latter no
case occurs in Oxfordshire. It has already been noticed, when referring
to Alwin, that a Leuric and an Alwin held Whitchurch freely in King
Eadward's time, which had now been confiscated to or purchased by
Milo Crispin, and a Leuric also held Wigentone (i.e. Wiggington, near
Banbury) freely in King Eadward's time, now in the hands of Wido
D'Oilgi3. And besides this it will be found that in the list of Tenentes
in Capite in Oxfordshire there is a William Leuric (No. XLVI) holding
three hydes and one virgate of the king, but the compiler of the Survey
has omitted to give the name of the place where the land was situated 4.
The form of Wluric is written generally Vluric, and is very common
in many counties. It is very probable that the manor of Redrefeld
(Rotherfield), which had fallen with so many others to Milo Crispin,
belonged once to the owner of the house in Oxford5. But it is not
without interest to note that the Domesday Survey for Kent, under the
1 It is perhaps hardly necessary to point out that the P is the old Saxon form of
the W ; and this is interesting to note, as showing that English forms of letters as
well as language were continued to such a degree that the king's English moneyer
adopted the English letter on his Norman master's coin.
2 Domesday, fol. 61 a, col. 1, 63 b, col. 1, and 158 a, col. 2.
3 Ibid. fol. 160 a, col. 1. * Ibid. 160 a, col. 2. 5 Ibid. 159 a, col. 2.
2JO THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
lands held by the canons of St. Martin's Church, Dover, in referring to
a certain prebend, adds that ' from the prebend the Bishop of Bayeux
took eight acres and gave them to Alan, his clerk ; now Vlric of
Ozeneford has them.' There would seem some reason for identi-
fying this with one of the Wlurics holding a house in Oxford.
The name of Godwin is perhaps one of the most frequent amongst
the tenants in King Eadward's time, but in William's time there are
comparatively few undertenants of the name, and fewer still tenentes in
capite amongst the King's thanes in Oxfordshire. However, there is
one who holds of the king two virgates and a half in Nortone1 (i.e.
Chipping Norton), and who may be the same as the holder of the
mansion ' which pays nothing.'
Ulmar's name occurs but rarely, and nowhere near Oxford. Goderun
occurs nowhere else, and may be an error on the part of the tran-
scriber. The name of Godric, like that of Godwin, is very common
amongst tenants in King Eadward's time, represented by many under-
tenants in King William's time, and by very few tenentes in capite. In
Oxfordshire a Godric held originally Chedintone (Kiddington), after-
wards held by Hascolf Musard ; and together with Alwin held
Lelelape (?) which fell to the wife of Roger of Ivry. Amongst the
undertenants in King William's reign we find a Godric, the owner
of one hyde in Sevewelle (Showell, near Swerford) under the Bishop of
Bayeux. In Berkshire the sheriff was named Godric, and as he died
fighting in the great battle, all his lands had been confiscated2.
Sawold, like Harding and Leveva, held as many as nine mansions.
As there was a Sawold holding manors as a tenant in King Eadward's
time, and as undertenant in King William's time in Oxfordshire,
possibly one may venture to identify him with the holder of the houses
in Oxford. Sawold, together with 'Aldwin and Edwin,' held Alwold-
esberie (? Albury) afterwards held by Walter Fitz Ponz. In King
William's time he held direct of the king Ropeford (Rofford, near
Chalgrove), but a note is added to this entry : ' Robert D'Oilgi has
this land in pledge {in vadimonio).' At Thame he held four hydes
under the Bishop of Lincoln, and five hydes at Stoke (probably Stoke,
near Checkenden) of the fee of the church of S. Mary of Lincoln.
Besides this it would appear that Sawold must have occupied the post
of sheriff of Oxfordshire at some time in William's reign, for amongst
the Westminster charters there is one relating to Marston, near Oxford,
beginning : —
1 Domesday, fol. i6ob; col. 2.
2 See ante, p. 245.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY 2J I
* Willem King gret Bundi stallere and Sawold Sirefen, and alle mine
thegnges on Oxnefordecire freondlice1.'
The above then is the list of names with which, according to the
Domesday Survey, the city of Oxford may be said to have been asso-
ciated. Some attempts have been made with regard to the first part
of the list, which includes the tenants in chief, who held manors in
the country and in the district, to show that these holdings in Oxford
corresponded to some extent to those manors in the shire. It has not
been considered that these persons were to be looked upon in any
sense as residents in Oxford, or especially connected with Oxford
further than that, since the list represents the majority of holders in
chief of the property in the neighbourhood, disputes respecting that
property would probably bring them to Oxford, in all cases when
they could not safely trust the matter to their subordinates.
How far the facts adduced are sufficient to show the connection
between the mansions and the manors, and how far the large propor-
tion of the manors held by a given tenant in chief, explain the cause
of his holding so many mansions in Oxford, is left to the reader's
judgment. On any other grounds than those suggested it is difficult
to account for such a distribution of houses in a town, and further the
key-note seems to be struck by the opening paragraph relating to the
king's houses, regarding which the older geld-roll would have been
more likely to be complete than as regards others ; as. to which the
commissioners were perhaps dependent on imperfect rolls, or on oral
tradition. In this entry of the twenty-five mansions, five are dis-
tinctly stated to be appropriate to the several manors, of which the
names are given ; and so at the end of the list of the mural mansions
two are said to belong to Hampton and Bletchingdon.
It will have been seen that amongst the tenants in chief are some
of the largest land-holders in the country, while some few of them are
recorded to have played a prominent part in the history of these
times. In the brief notes upon the manors held by them it will have
been seen how their property was scattered as a rule over the whole
kingdom, and by a summary even of the manors held in the county
it will have been observed how their property was still further dis-
persed, seldom two manors lying together ; the same man holding
property in the extreme south of the county as well as in the extreme
1 Westminster Cartulary MS. Cotton Faustina, A III. folio 112 b. Printed in
Dugclale, ed. 1846, vol. i. p. 301. The name of Bundi occurs not unfrequently in
Domesday as a tenant. T. R. E. See e. g. in Oxfordshire, folio 157 b, col. 1.
27- THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
north. At the same time it is felt that in bringing these considerations
together the difficulties in arriving at a true view of the confiscation of
the lands at the Conquest are rather illustrated than explained. The
surveyors name the previous tenants in only a few cases, and no light
seems to be thrown upon the matter of distribution from this source
since, as far as can be observed from the imperfect data, the property
of one tenant in the Time of King Eadward seems as a rule to have
been distributed to several different tenants in the Time of King
William.
It has been supposed that the second half of the list, that is, the
names connected with the forty-five manors, represent those of the
actual tenants, that is, the occupants of the houses, and that they may
therefore be reckoned as citizens of Oxford at this time. A few notes
have been added here and there; but while on the one hand the
references to the names found elsewhere are confessedly imperfect, on
the other hand the identification of the names with them when so
found is as a rule purely conjectural. Taking the series however as
a whole, they seem to illustrate in a measure what might easily be con-
jectured from other considerations, that several tenants in chief in the
Time of King Eadward, came to be under tenants in the Time of
King William ; a few, very few, and those entered amongst the king's
thanes in the Domesday Survey *, seem by purchase or favour to have
retained something of their former estate.
The list however cannot, it is feared, be said to represent the chief
citizens of Oxford. Though the number of the burgesses is frequently
named in other towns, the Survey here is silent, merely intimating that
twenty burgesses in the Time of King Eadward went for the others
when the king called upon them to go on an expedition. Further,
the list must represent a very small proportion of the occupants ; for
we do not know any of the names of those occupying the houses '2
held by the King, the two earls, the bishops, the abbeys, and the
Conqueror's followers, in all a hundred and thirty-six houses, many
of which must have been as large if not larger than those referred to
afterwards; besides this, for the remaining forty-five houses, we
have only the names of thirty-seven occupiers.
And yet, if we look elsewhere amongst the few documents existing
at this time, we find that it is very difficult to add any appreciable
1 Domesday Survey, No. lviii. folio 160 b.
2 The total of these houses is 217, but there were 81 waste. This total does not
include the eighteen houses of priests and canons (of which nine were waste), or of
the 62 houses held by the supposed occupants, of which seventeen were waste.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 273
number of names to those given in the Survey. For example, in the
list given by the Abingdon Chronicle of the houses purchased in
Oxford, the rents of which, in the next reign, were set aside for the
use of the infirmary of that abbey1, we find that out of five names
three, viz. Wlfwi, Derman, and Coleman, are the same we have had
already. Ruald and Eadwin only are new names. It must be borne
in mind that this document belongs to the early part of Henry I's
reign, and some fifteen years or so had elapsed, so that Ruald may
be a new comer ; still, as we find in a grant made to Ensham Abbey
by Robert D'Oilgi of ltotam illam terram quam tenet de eo Rualdus in
Oxeneford2, it is quite possible that he was the occupant of one of
D'Oilgi's twelve mansions. In the Abingdon list also Eadwin is
found, named as the moneyer, and this seems to point to the fact
that Swetman was dead or had been superseded ; and it will be
observed that Eadwin's brother also is mentioned.
In the same list of purchases, which Faritius had made ' in Oxen-
fordia urbe] there was the land with the houses of Roger Maledoctus.
We find elsewhere in the Chronicle an account of his gift in Henry
the First's reign, but we have no means of knowing how long before
he had become possessed of the houses. It seems he came to the
chapter of the monks of Abingdon, together with his wife, named
Odelina, and gave ' terram cum domibus quas in Oxenford habebantz?
Part of their bargain was that they should both be buried in the
church at Abingdon, which is very suggestive of the low estimate in
which S. Frideswide's was held by them.
In the same list also the name of Peter, the sheriff of Oxfordshire,
occurs, as owning a house in Oxford. This Peter must have held
the post of sheriff soon after the time of the Domesday Survey, for
there is a writ issued to him apparently at the beginning of William
Rums' reign 4. This writ also refers to Eadwi, his praepositus, which
may perhaps mean the Port-reeve of Oxford for the time being ; it is
just possible too that this is the same as Eadwi the moneyer, men-
tioned above, for Eadwi and Eadwin are no doubt the same name ;
though, if it was the same person, he probably would not have held
the two offices at one and the same time.
The mention of ' Saulf ' of Oxford, in Domesday, under Wallingford5,
1 See ante, p. 264.
2 From the Ensham Cartulary. Printed in Dugdale, vol. iii. p. 21. We
further find that amongst the signatures to that grant occurs the name of Nicholaus
filius Sawoldi. ,
3 Chron. Mon. Ab., ii. p. 139. 4 Ibid. p. 41.
5 Domesday, folio 56 a. See ante, p. 228.
T
274 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
may be added to the list of names connected with Oxford, unless
indeed it be a variety of the name Sawold : while the names of
William Fitz Nigel, and Gilbert of Damari will also have been observed
as having given their Oxford houses to Ensham, and, as has been
suggested, towards the endowment of S. Ebbe's Church \
Also in a suit early in King Henry the First's reign (before 1117)
we find that the Abbot of Abingdon held his court ' apud Oxe?ieford in
domo Thomae dc Sancto Jo/ianne2.' The circumstances also attend-
ing Ermenold's suit and his house, * juxia pontem Oxeneford'\' belong
to the next century ; but the house may well have been standing in
the eleventh century.
Again, though it is trespassing somewhat upon the material of the
next century, the list of the tenants here given of the houses granted
to Oseney Abbey, by the charter of foundation in 11 29, carries on
some of the names already given, as well as gives others who may
have been living in the houses when they were counted in the Survey.
The grant includes : —
* Within the town of Oxford, the lands which the following held,
Engeric, Reimund, Godwin, Ailnoth, Edwacher's son, Ermenold,
Godwin Nicuma (?), Sweting Cad'ica (?), Ravenig, Segrim By wall
(juxta murum), Henry Corveiser, Leofwin Claudus, Godwin the
moneyer, Brichtrec the moneyer, Godric, William Ralph the baker,
Leofwine Budda, Geoffrey the miller, and near the castle of
Oxford, beneath the wall, one mansion which belonged to Warine
the chaplain4.'
Many of these early names too are very constant in Oxford. For
instance, in the charter by King Stephen confirming the property
which S. Frideswide's had acquired during Henry the First's reign,
we find the houses of Ailwin, Sewi, Editha (a widow), Saul (possibly a
contraction of Sawold), Golde[win], Godric, and Alwi ; while the names
of Segrim and Sewi constantly occur in deeds relating to S. Frideswide's
property. And if we go on further, even to the Hundred Rolls in the
course of the inquisition taken in Edward the First's reign, we still
find the names of Edric, Harding, Segrim, Sewi, Godwin, and Swet-
man as those of resident citizens of Oxford, and several have survived
1 See ante, p. 243.
3 Ckron. A/on. Ab., ii. p. 134. Thomas of St. John appears to have been
appointed Sheriff of Oxfordshire. Ibid. 119.
3 Chron. A/on. Ab., ii. pp. 140, 141, ad. 196.
4 Printed in Dugdale, vol. vi. p. 251. The original is in the Oseney Cartulary
(Cottonian Vitellius E. xv.), and though the edges are burnt it happens to be quite
legible. The titles nicuma and cadica are puzzling. It will be observed there
are two new Moneyers.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 275
even to far later times. The name Sewi again survives in Sewy's
Lane, as will be seen in the recent map of the Ordnance Survey1,
though it does not follow that it dates from the Sewi living in the time
of William the Conqueror.
Taking then the Survey of Oxford Domesday as a whole, and
bringing to bear upon it what illustrations charters or other docu-
ments provide, and reading it by the light of existing remains,
it presents to us a town measuring about half-a-mile from east to
west, and a little more than a quarter-of-a-mile (about 480 yards)
from north to south, fortified and compact. Domesday, it will have
been observed, tells us that dues from certain houses were set aside
for the keeping the fortifications in repair, and draws a clear distinction
between the houses within and without the wall 2. Moreover it is re-
ferred to in one place as a city {civitas) 3, a name rarely given to towns.
From the survival through mediaeval times of the line of the fortifica-
tion we can fairly judge of the extent of the town, and the number of
houses being given, we are able to form some idea of the general
aspect. Compared with the time 4 when JEthelred, ealdorman of the
Mercians, took possession of Oxford in 912, much which was then
perhaps still pasture land and woodland had given way to houses with
their gardens, until the whole of the plateau of the gravel promontory,
the sloping edges of which are washed by the Thames on the south
and west, and by the Cherwell on the east, had in 1087 come to be
occupied by habitations 5.
Some of the chief features however were no doubt the same. The
main roads, the sides of which were more definitely marked by houses
than they were before, so that they were now streets, still followed the
old lines, meeting in the centre at Carfax, and at the far western
1 The lane led from New Inn Hall Street by S. Michael's Schoolhouse into
Cornmarket Street, crossing through where Messrs. Grimbly and Hughes' premises
were built. By neglect the right of way seems to have been lost. It was for a
time called Shoe Lane.
2 Note also the 'thirty acres of meadow near the wall,' ante, p. 225.
3 Molinum quem infra civitatem habebat. See ante, p. 219, but in the next line
but three it runs In ipsa villa. So far as has been observed, the only towns
throughout the whole of the Domesday Survey to which civitas is applied are Can-
terbury, Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Shrewsbury, and Chester.
* See ante, p. 11 9-1 2 2.
5 The plateau may be reckoned to be about 36 feet above the level of the river
beneath Folly Bridge, the slope being, as a rule, uniformly gentle throughout ; the
most rapid part of the slope is that between the site of South Gate (at the south-
western corner of Christ Church) and Carfax, being something like 24 feet in 280
yards, while from the ground just below the Castle Mound on the way to the
Station the rise to Carfax is about 24 feet in 500 yards, and from the High Street,
by the turn to Long Wall to Carfax, only 24 feet in the 700 yards.
T 2
276 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
extremity of the town beneath the slope there still rose the Castle
mound. But the ditches here had probably been deepened, and the
earthen vallum had no doubt been faced with stone work, and
perhaps in places surrounded by a stone wall ; while along the western
edge overhanging the river there now rose the great tall tower, a more
conspicuous object than the mound itself, and no doubt the wonder
and admiration of the citizens.
The view of the Castle as given by Loggan, though some allowance
must be made for the effects put in by the artist, probably represents
most of the chief features as they existed at the close of the eleventh
century. In after years the more imposing fortification of Henry the
Third's time, and the greater amount of buildings had no doubt much
changed the aspect and obscured the original landmarks ; but when in
the seventeenth century these additions had been swept away, leaving
the deep ditch with the water standing in it, the Vallum, the Mound,
the Tower, and the Mill as the chief objects, the artist was able to
draw, and has drawn a picture as closely representing the appearance
which the Castle presented in the eleventh century as possible. He
has perhaps exaggerated the high rising ground on the outer edge of
the castle ditch on the north side, and which appears to have been the
place of execution, and called the Mont de juis ; at least it is not
probable that it existed at the time of the Survey of such a size as to
endanger the safety of the castle. It has now been almost levelled.
Its position would be on the northern side of the enclosure occupied
by the Canal wharfs, lying between the New Road and the western end
of George Street. It is very possible, however, that in deepening the
ditches in the Conqueror's time a large quantity of soil was thrown out
here, just as the excavation of the original ditch had provided the material
for the Castle Mound. Further, the artist has represented a row
of houses on the outer edge of the Castle ditch, on the eastern side
towards the city, with what is now Bulwarks Lane curving round
behind them and forming a street ; while the houses have their little
gardens at the back lining the outer slope of the ditch, and trees
growing on either side of the stream beneath. It is not improbable
that some such appearance may have presented itself in the eleventh
century ; as long as the gardens did not interfere with the fortification1,
the tenants might in time of peace have been allowed to use the
1 The plan of the Castle engraved by Skelton (Oxonia Antiqua Restaurata, 1843,
pi. 127) from the drawing, temp. Elizabeth, in possession of the Dean and Chapter
of Christ Church, shows the houses also with their gardens. They are shown
partially in Agas' map, but they are not so numerous. In continental towns it is
not unusual to see the slopes of fortifications utilized for garden purposes.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. ZJJ
ground, though in time of siege the houses themselves might have
been, if thought necessary, wholly swept away.
At the time of the Domesday Survey the view of the town, with a
much increased number of buildings, concentrated within a well-
defined boundary, would have at first sight presented a marked con-
trast to the few groups of habitations clustering round the north side
of S. Frideswide's, or scattered over the sloping ground between the
Castle ditch and the central spot where the roads crossed, such as
would have been seen a hundred years before. Further, the fortifi-
cations must have been of a more imposing character, and though
we have only evidence of the two tall towers of the Castle and of
S. Michael's, guarding the west and north of Oxford, it would be rash to
say that the east and south gates were not so guarded. It is true the
north gate was the most liable to be attacked, but the east and south
were still liable. Again, it is hard to think that they were the only
two towers which rose from amidst the town of Oxford, where so
many churches existed already1.
But with all the growth of buildings, if much stress is laid upon the
returns made by the inhabitants when they were to be taxed, con-
cerning the number of houses which were vasfae, nearly five hundred
must be supposed to have had closed doors, or their roofs fallen to
decay, or indeed perhaps presenting in some cases only bare walls,
while less than two hundred and fifty were in such a habitable state as
to pay the tax ; the town, if this were so, must have presented to the
visitor so forlorn an aspect that it might have appeared more busy and
prosperous in the days when Eadward the Elder took possession of it
and fortified it. But it would be a mistake to lay too much stress
upon these returns, since so many contingencies, as already pointed out,
are included under the word vasfae. The population of a thousand,
the number suggested, would, as towns went in those days, present a
busy scene. Already the roads had given way to streets, and the
houses dotted about, each for the most part with a garden behind it,
or sometimes standing clear within its plot of ground 2, were thus so
distributed that their varied roofs of tiles or wooden shingles, or stone
slabs, would have given an aspect of a populous town. Although too
it is difficult to judge of the kind of business which was done, it may
be fairly considered that more took place in the open-air in proportion
to what takes place there at the present day; that is, many more
people would be seen in the streets and open spaces, in proportion to
1 As to the tower of S. Frideswide's in 1002, see ante, p. 148.
2 See ante, p. 256, note 5.
278 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the population than is now the case; and this would add life and
brightness to the scene.
The chief market-place probably occupied an important position
near the centre of the town, if not at Carfax itself, though we do not
find a notice of it in any of the few records which we have belonging
to the century \ The existence of the market may be assumed as a
matter of certainty, though we do not definitely hear of it till wc find
in Henry II's reign disputes arising between the market men of
Oxford and of Wallingford on one side, against the market men of
Abingdon on the other, the former evidently considering that the
ancient privileges of their market had been invaded by those which
the men of Abingdon had, through the interest of the Abbot, obtained
from the Crown 2.
And again as to the fairs ; it is not till the reign of Henry I that
we find a charter professing to be granted by the king to the com-
munity of S. Frideswide to hold a fair for seven days, with especial
privileges belonging thereto; but then it was that S. Frideswide's
monastery was arousing itself from its lethargy, and obtaining as many
privileges as possible ; so that it would be most unreasonable to sup-
pose that fairs existed in Oxford then for the first time.
As already pointed out, we obtain in contemporary records few if any
mention of trades in the town3; we have only the mills, the gardens in
Holywell manor, and the business of Wulwi the fisherman mentioned,
yet other trades and occupations were no doubt in existence, though
accident has prevented record of them. There must have been bakers
and brewers and butchers then as well as now, and though for pur-
chasing clothes, crockery, household utensils and the like, the citizens
waited till fair time, and there were but few if any shops, such as we
have in abundance now, still there must have been tailors and
carpenters, and smiths, though no record of the name of even one has
been handed down.
There must also have been at times a great deal of business going
forward connected with the peace and welfare of the town, and in a
case of this kind we may fairly gather something from the light which
1 In the next century the land of Ralph Brito is described as ' infra forum
Oxcneford sitaniy Chron. Mon. Ab., ii. p. 212.
2 'Adierunt regem istum Henricum juniorem Walingefordenses, cum 11s de
Oxeneforde de foro ei Abbendonensi suggerentes quoniam aliter esset quam esse
deberet,' &c. Chron. Mon. Ab.t ii. p. 227.
3 The earliest charter referring to a Gilda Mcrcatoria which has been observed,
is one by Henry III (1229); but as it is a confirmation of previous liberties, it
implies a previous existence.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY. 279
after history reflects back on this period. We may consider that the
town meetings took place in the open space, then existing on the
north side of Carfax church, and in bad weather it is not impossible
that much was transacted in the nave of the church itself1.
Amongst other things it will be seen by the Survey 2 that sixty pounds
had to be provided as an annual payment to the king, but probably
payable by quarterly instalments, and the provision each quarter for
the sum required must have entailed much discussion, and much busi-
ness connected with the assessment of such taxes, whence the money
was to be obtained, and in the administration of such property whence
revenue was derived towards supplying the sums needed.
Further it has already been shown that from Oxford being a shire
town, many of the manors in the county, and several in the adjoining
counties possessed houses there, in order that their owners or tenants
could find a residence when they came to transact the various business
which must necessarily take place in the management of large proper-
ties, and settle those differences which must be constantly arising where
rival interests are at stake.
Gemots and courts of several kinds therefore were constantly being
held in Oxford, but from the few references to their practical working
which we have left to us, and the imperfect summaries of the laws in
force at that time which have been preserved, it is difficult to distinguish
the various forms of procedure, or ascertain how often various courts
were sitting. In the laws which King Eadward the Elder (904-24)
issued, he decreed as follows : —
* I will that each Reeve have a gemot always once in four weeks, and
so do that every man be worthy of folk-right3.'
This is repeated in the laws of King Eadgar (959-75), and in a series
of additional laws belonging to the same king we find : —
'Let the hundred gemot be attended as it was before fixed, and
thrice in the year let a burh-gemot be held ; and twice a shire-gemot*.'
And in the laws of King Cnut, the references to the shire and burh-
gemots are in almost exactly the same words, and there is good reason
to suppose that this series of laws are in substance those which were
decreed at Oxford in 1018, when ' Danes and Angles were unanimous
1 That churches were at times used for purposes of administering justice in
various ways is evident. Amongst the laws of Eadward the Confessor it is decreed,
* Et si barones sint qui judicia non habeant ; in hundredo ubi placitum habitum
fuerit, ad propinquiorem ecclesiam ubi judicium regis erit, determinandum est.
salvis recti tudinibus baronum ipsorum.' Thorpe's Ancient Laws, &c, vol. i. p. 446.
2 See ante, p. 223.
3 Thorpe's Laws and Institutes of England. London 1840, vol. i. p. 165.
4 Ibid. vol. i. p. 269.
28o THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
for Eadgar's law1, and that these various gemots were continued during
the Conqueror's reign is shown by their being virtually repeated in the
laws of Henry the First2.
It may be presumed that at one of these gemots the set of laws
especially relating to Oxford, which are found enrolled at the end of
the king's manors in Oxfordshire in the Domesday Survey, were pro-
mulgated. These few laws are expressed as follows : —
1 The king's peace given under hand or seal ; if any shall break it
so that he kill a man to whom this peace has been given, his members
and life shall be at the king's will if he be taken, and if he cannot be
taken, he shall by all men be counted as an exile ; and if any one shall
succeed in killing him he shall lawfully have his goods3.
* If any stranger choosing to live in Oxford, and having a house
independently of his parents, shall there end his life, the king shall
have whatever he has left.
' If any shall break or enter into the court or house of any one, so
that he knock down (? occidat), wound, or assault a man, he pays to the
king one hundred shillings.
' Likewise he who when summoned to go ' on expedition,' does not
go, shall give one hundred shillings to the king.
' If any shall have killed [interfecerit] any one within his own court or
house, his body and all his substance are in the king's power, except
the dowry of his wife if she shall have had a dowry V
It is difficult to see why these five laws should be especially enacted at
this time and place. It looks rather as if they were judgments which
had been given as cases which had occurred, perhaps recently, or
during the then sheriffs tenure of office, and which he thought it
good to have enrolled; for there is reason to think that Domesday
Book was looked upon as a Dom-boc, or book of decrees (do mas).
It will be observed that the second law mentions Oxford by name,
1 See ante, p. 161.
2 ' Debet autem scyresmot et burgemot bis, hundreta vel wapentagia duodecies in
anno congregari.' Thorpe's Laws, &c, vol. i. p. 514.
3 The ' king's peace' here especially referred to is mentioned at the head of the
list given in the laws of King Eadward the Confessor, ' Pax regis multiplex est.
Alia data manu sua quam Anglici vocant Kingcs hand-sealde grith. Alia per
breve suum data. Alia, &c, &c.' (Thorpe, vol. i. p. 447.) There does not appear
to be any special law previously enacted relating to the breach of the king's hand
grith apart from the breaking of the king's peace generally, though the expression
is frequently found. Note especially Thorpe, pp. 167, 319, 359, 453, 454, and
518. This Oxford law however is afterwards incorporated into the laws of
Henry I. in the following terms : ' Qui pacem regis fregerit, quam idem manu sua
dabi alicui, si capiatur, de membris culpa sit' (ibid. p. 585). At the same time it
is uncertain how far the compilations which go under the name of Leges Regis
Henrici Pritni, were ever authoritatively promulgated.
1 Domesday, folio 154 b, col. 2. Appendix A, § 101.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 381
as if it was applicable solely to this town; the case may perhaps
have arisen from some one, probably an Englishman driven out from
some other town, who had come and taken up his abode in Oxford,
and without friends or relations. The third law seems at first sight
a repeal of one of those laws of King Cnut, which, as already said,
were possibly decreed at Oxford on the occasion mentioned in the
Chronicle. In those laws 'house-breaking,' that is Hus-hryce, was
decreed, according to secular law, to be bof-kss1, while here the fine
is fixed. But there may be some special circumstance in this case
which the terse language in which the law is laid down does not ex-
plain. The word ' oca'dat,' too, probably has the meaning of knocking
down, and does not involve killing, since it is put in the same category
as vulneret and assah'at, and is therefore to be contrasted with inter-
fecerit, which occurs in the fifth law relating to similar offences.
The fourth of the series also seems to be in a measure connected
with the succeeding laws as they stand in the series enacted by King
Cnut above referred to, since it defines the penalties for neglecting
any one of the three obligations imposed by the trinoda necessitas,
i. e. of fortification, making of bridges, and going on expeditions.
The law of King Cnut stood as follows :
< 66. If any one neglect " burh-bot," or " bricg-bot," or "fyrd-fare " ;
let him make " bot " with one hundred and twenty shillings to the
king by English law, and by Danish law as it formerly stood ; or let
him clear himself,' &c.2
In this it would seem that though Cnut's laws recognized the English
law as the guiding principle, there might be occasions on which the
Danish law might be administered. What the bot under the Danish
law was does not seem to be ascertainable ; but here we seem to have
William the Conqueror's law promulgated in Oxford, reducing the fine
imposed by Cnut's law and agreed upon in the same city, from 120 shil-
lings to 100 shillings. But the promulgation of this law at Oxford has a
further significance in illustrating the passage in the Domesday Survey,
1 Laws of King Cnut, No. 65. ' Hus-bryce .... sefter woruld-lage is bot-leas.'
(Thorpe, vol. i. p. 410.)
2 Laws of King Cnut, No. 66. ' Lif hwa burh-bote oththe bricg-bote oththe fyrd-
fare forsitte gebete mid hund-twelftigum scill tham cyningce on Engla-lage and on
Dena-lage swa hit ser stod oththe geladige nine,' &c. (Thorpe, vol. i. p. 410.) This
law is practically repeated in the compilation of laws known as those of Henry I,
viz. under Cap. LXVL as follows : ' Si quis burcbotam vel brig botam vel fierdfar
supersederit emendet hoc erga regem cxx. solidos in Anglorum laga ; in Denelaga
sicut stetit antea vel ita se allegiet/ &c. No notice seems to be taken of the revised
Oxford law in this respect. But, as already pointed out, there seems much reason to
suppose the laws of Henry I. to be for the most part a mere unauthorised compilation.
a82 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
in which the law of Eadward the Confessor ran that twenty burgesses
should go, or pay a fine of £20 — that is, twenty shillings per man. By
the issue of the law by the Conqueror it seems the fyrd-farc was con-
tinued in Oxford, and that the fine for neglect was practically 100
shillings per man. Still, with so little material on which to base conclu-
sions, it is impossible, perhaps, to suggest any very definite hypothesis
for the appearance of these five laws in the Oxford Domesday.
We incidentally obtain in another of Cnut's Oxford laws a hint that the
shire gemot was a sort of court of appeal. One law runs as follows :—
1 And let no man take any distress either in the shire or out of the
shire before he has thrice demanded his right in the hundred. If at
the third time he have no justice, then let him go at the fourth time
to the shire-gemot, and let the shire appoint him a fourth term V
Other minor courts are sometimes mentioned : —
* Moreover let there not be " miskenninga " in Husteng, nor in
Folkesmote, nor in other pleadings within the city. And the Husteng
shall sit once in the week, that is to say on Monday V
Though certain details are given as regards things to be done in Folc-
motes, it is not made clear what relation it bore to the others. The
Wardemote* is also found incidentally mentioned. The Hustings Court
has existed in Oxford down to quite recent times ; the proceedings
of which, from the time of Edward II to that of Charles II, are
enrolled in the Liber Aldus preserved in the City Archives 5.
There is another name also which has been observed applied to
a particular court held in Oxford, namely, the Portmanni-mot, and
though the reference is to proceedings early in the following reign,
the circumstances of the case show that the name was a survival,
and not a new name introduced after the Conquest. The Abingdon
chronicler, after describing a judgment concerning Ermenold's house,
already referred to as being in the south of Oxford, adds, ' And after-
wards it (i.e. the judgment) was shown in Portmannimot and agreed to
in the same manner, and according to the same arrangement0.'
1 Thorpe, vol. i. p. 387.
2 Temp. Henry I. Thorpe, vol. i. p. 503. As to the term Miskenninga, Ducange
defines this, following Brompton, as Variatio loquclac in curia. It seems to mean
that a change of issue during proceedings in court was provided against ; in other
words that all counts must be set forth before the proceedings are instituted, and
in some cases in later years the word seems to be applied to the mulct which was
demanded for the offence of such mispleading.
3 Temp. Henry I. Thorpe, vol. i. p. 614.
* Temp. Henry I. ' Et terras suas, et ivardcmotum, et debita civibus meis
habere faciam infra civitatem et extra.' Thorpe, vol. i. p. 503.
5 See Turner's Selections from the Records of the City of Oxford, 1880.
6 4 Sed et postea in Portviannimot ostensum et concessum eodem modo et eadem
conventione est.' Chron. Mon. Ab., vol. ii. p. 141.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA V SURVEY. 283
But, besides these, we find several instances in the following reign
of courts held in Oxford by the Abbot of Abingdon1 or the Abbot of
Ensham, and such courts were no doubt frequently held ; and probably
lords of manors, so far as they had right to do so, found it con-
venient on occasions to hold their court in the shire town.
The business then at all these courts, whether connected with the in-
terests of the king or with that of the town or of the county as a whole,
or of the various manors which made up the county, must have caused
not only much concourse among the towns-people, but large numbers
from the country would visit Oxford ; rich litigants did not travel
alone, but brought their servants and often considerable retinues with
them. Besides, there was a large amount of criminal procedure to be
got through affecting individuals, and though perhaps a good deal
would be disposed of near the place where the crime may have been
committed, there must have been a considerable residue to be got
through in the chief county town.
The Castle too, in which no doubt a guard of some number was
kept, to be at the bidding of Robert D'Oilgi, would as a rule show
signs of activity. Probably here soldiers would be seen constantly
coming and going, for the country in many parts was very unsettled 2.
At such a central spot as Oxford, no doubt a good supply of cavalry
was retained in case of emergency, and they would probably exercise
in the great meadow called the King's Mead, which lies on the south
of the Botley Road, and which Robert D'Oilgi was accused of
taking from Abingdon Abbey.
Probably not much was gained to the activity of the town as yet,
from the ancient foundation of St. Frideswide. Still the monastery
must have had an existence and probably an extensive enclosure, and
there must have been monks to be seen going to and fro, and the
sound of bells at stated times would be heard, if not from a tall tower,
at least, from something of the nature of a steeple 3. Oseney, which
was afterwards to occupy the island meadows beyond the Castle out-
side the farthest western extremity of the town, did not yet exist.
The town, as will have been seen, was already well supplied with
churches. When we add together the names of those which we
obtain incidentally from the Domesday Survey, and those which we
glean from other sources, including S. Frideswide 's Church itself, we
find we have in all eight in number from the several sources.
1 A copy of one of the licences from the King, viz. that granted to Abbot Vincent,
temp. Hen. I, is preserved. Chron. Mon. Ab. ii. p. 165.
2 See ante, p. 204.
3 As to the tower of S. Frideswide, see ante, p. 148.
284 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
1. S. Frideswide ... (a.D. 757) S. Fridesivide Cart .
2. S. Martin ( „ 1034) Abingdon Chron.
3. S. George ( „ 1074) Oseney Cart.
4. S. Mary Magdalen ... ( „ 1074) Ibid.
5. S. Mary the Virgin ... ( „ 1087) Domesday.
6. S.Michael ( „ „) Ibid.
7. S. Ebbe ... ... ( „ „ ) Ibid.
8. S. Peter ( „ „ ) Ibid.
The question arises, was the town as yet mapped out into parishes ?
A priori on the building of a church, a district would naturally be
assigned to it. In the country, as a rule, the churches had been built
by the lords of the manors, and the manors formed the parishes, but
in towns the growth of parishes and their sub-division may often have
been gradual. Looking at the map, and comparing it with the list of
churches above named, we see that a parish belonging to King Cnut's
church, dedicated to S. Martin, must have occupied the same general
position wrhich it does now, namely the centre of the town, and
possibly of much the same extent, comprising as it does small portions
of each of the four quarters into which the two main streets divide the
town. S. Michael's parish must also have occupied the district be-
tween S. Martin's and the north wall of the city as it does now.
Robert D'Oilgi's church of S. George in the castle probably served
for the inhabitants on the western slopes between S. Martin's parish,
and the Castle ditch, while S. Ebbe's Church, which the energy of
Ensham Abbey had given to Oxford, supplied those inhabitants
whose houses lay between the others and the south wall.
On the eastern side of the street leading down to the south gate,
S. Frideswide's no doubt would be supposed to administer to the
spiritual wants of the population around it, and may indeed, perhaps,
have extended its jurisdiction over to the western side of the same street,
while in the north-eastern quarter of the town Earl Alberic's church,
dedicated to S. Mary, and to the east of it Robert D'Oilgi's church
dedicated to S. Peter, may be supposed to have exercised a juris-
diction over all but the small portions belonging to S. Michael's and
S. Martin's. At the south-eastern corner of the city, the portion
lying on the east of the precincts of S. FVideswide may have perhaps
been partly within the jurisdiction of that monastery, and partly of the
parish church of S. Peter's on the other side of the street.
S. Mary Magdalen's Church, being wholly without the north gate,
took in the suburb to the north of Oxford, while that of S. Peter's
would have taken in the suburb of Robert D'Oilgi's manor of Holywell.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 285
S. George's would have supplied any houses which had been erected
beyond the Castle ditch, on the northern and western side, while on the
southern side, or beyond the southern wall, in this direction any
habitations would readily have found themselves beneath the influence
of the Church of S. Aebba.
Such an outline represents then the division of Oxford according to
the list of eight churches which we find actually recorded as definitely
existing before the close of William the Conqueror's reign, but it must
not be denied that one or two considerations render it doubtful
whether, after all, the above completes the list of the churches which
Oxford possessed at the time. For the reign of William Rufus, and
for the first few years of Henry the First's reign, there is a singular
absence of records. But soon after the restoration of S. Frideswide's
we find a charter professing to be given by Henry the First \ reciting
all the churches in which S. Frideswide's held any rights. Including
chapels, they are nine in number, and it will be observed that only one
of them, namely S. Michael's at north gate, is common to the two
lists. Of course it is possible that eight more churches should have
been added to Oxford between 1087, the date of the Domesday Survey,
and before the close of Henry the First's reign, a period of nearly
fifty years, but still it is not probable ; it may therefore be supposed
that some of them existed earlier. The names, however, and a few
remarks upon the evidence for the early origin suggested for some,
may not be altogether out of place, in considering the number of the
churches in Oxford before the close of the eleventh century.
The list runs as follows : —
The Church of All Saints.
The Church of S. Mildred.
*The Church of S. Michael, ad portam Borealem.
1 The signatures are wanting to the charter, and it must not be overlooked that
in the title and style of the king at the commencement, the charter might as well be
ascribed to Henry the Second as to Henry the First. At the same time the rubric
in the S. Frideswide Cartulary, prefixed to the charter, runs Sequitur prima carta
Henrici primi ; unless his copy had a date or signatures the compiler or transcriber
might have been easily misled. Kennett, in his Parochial Antiquities (ed. 1818, vol. i.
p. 125), includes it under the year n 32. Antony a Wood appears to give through-
out his references 11 22, but the evidence for either of these dates has not been
observed. There are reasons however, why some doubt must be thrown upon
the date ascribed by the copyist if not upon the genuine character of the charter.
See e.g. post, p. 292. The question is further complicated by the fact that a charter
purporting to be given by the Empress Matilda, dated from Oxford, and with the
signature of Robert Bp. of London (appointed 1141) and Robert of Gloucester
(who died 1145), an(i which must therefore, if genuine, have been granted in
1 142 when Matilda was besieged in Oxford, contains exactly the same list almost
in the same words.
286 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
The Church of S. Peter, ad Cast rum.
The moiety of the Church of S. Aldae.
The Chapel of S. Michael, ad portam Australem.
The Church of S. Edward.
The Chapel of the Holy Trinity.
Without the city, the Chapel of S. Clement.
It is to this confirmation charter of Henry the First that the compiler
of the S. Frideswide's Cartulary invariably refers for the origin of
the churches in which the monastery had any direct interest. He
evidently had found nothing whatever referring to any earlier event, or
of an earlier date than this one charter ascribed to Henry the First.
To show this it is only necessary to transcribe the rubrics which he
has inserted at the head of the divisions of the Cartulary which
refer to the respective parishes ; they run as follows : —
1 i. Memorandum that the Church of S. Frideswide possessed the
Church of All Saints through (per) Henry the First, formerly King of
England, as appears above in the foundation [in Fundatione], &C.1
1 2. Notandum that the Church of S. Mildred was collated to the
Church of S. Frideswide, with the other churches and possessions as
in the foundation, &c.2
' 3. Memorandum that the Church of S. Peter in the Castle
(S. Petri ad Castrum) was given to the Church of S. Frideswide by
King Henry the First, as appears in the charter of the same and in
the foundation, &c.3
1 4. Sciendum that the Church of S. Michael was collated to the
Church of S. Frideswide at the foundation of the same, as appears
above in the foundation, &c.4
1 5. Notandum that Henry the First, King of England, gave to the
Church of S. Frideswide the moiety of the Church of S. Aldate
(S. Aldathi), in Oxon5, and this, as above, in the foundation, &c.
'6. Memorandum that the Chapel of S. Michael [i.e. at South
gate] was given to the Church of S. Frideswide at the first establish-
ment {in prima creatione) of the Regular Canons there, as appears
above in the foundation of the place, &c.6
1 7. Memorandum that the Church of S. Edward was granted to
us by Henry, formerly King of England, as appears above in the
foundation, &c.7
1 8. Notandum that the Chapel of the Holy Trinity, over the
East gate (supra portam Orientalem), together with its appurtenances,
was collated to the aforesaid church [i.e. of S. Frideswide] by
Henry the First, formerly King of England, as appears above in the
foundation 8.
1 Cartulary of S. Frideswide in possession of the Dean and Chapter of Christ
Church, folio 407. 2 Ibid, folio 482. 3 Ibid, folio 399.
* Ibid, folio 437. 5 Ibid, folio 357. c Ibid, folio 337. 7 Ibid, folio 325.
8 Ibid, folio 453. This rubric stands as the head of the parish of S. Peter in the
East.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 287
1 9. Sciendum that Henry the First, formerly King of England,
gave to the Church of S. Frideswide the Chapel of S. Clement, as
appears above in the foundation, &C.1 '
Although in the above series of Rubrics there are one or two
which, if taken singly, might seem to imply that there was more
material on which the writer based his statements than the one
charter of Henry the First, which is given at the beginning, taking
them as a whole, the variations must be ascribed partly to the arts
which a chronicler uses in writing, and partly to the desire to connect
the grants with the king's authority, which of course would weigh
much in their favour in courts of law. Supposing then for a moment
this document to be genuine, and that it points to a confirmation of
the property in churches held by S. Frideswide at that time, it proves
the churches to have been in existence early in the twelfth century, but
by no means disproves the earlier existence of the church before
the date of that charter, or even before the date of the revival of S.
Frideswide's about 11 20, because it was not at all unusual to transfer
churches which had been already erected by private benefaction to
the care and authority of some religious house. If it is a forgery it is
of course left still open to suppose that some of the churches might
have been in existence before the close of the eleventh century, but on
the other hand, that some of the churches named did not come into exist-
ence till the close of the twelfth or beginning of the thirteenth century.
It has been supposed for instance that the circumstance of a
church being dedicated to S. Mildred, an English saint, points to that
church being erected before the Conquest. The view of course is
based upon the supposition that after the Conquest the chief bene-
factors to churches would most likely be those who were wealthy, and
who had come over with or been favoured by the Conqueror, so that in
most parts of the country the English saints which had hitherto
been popular would be forgotten ; while as regards the popularity of
S. Mildred there could be no question. The Abbess of the church of
Minster, on the southern shore of Thanet (which was then more of an
isle than it is now), died towards the close of the seventh century of a
lingering illness. The church and conventual buildings over which she
had presided, suffered like the rest throughout the kingdom, during the
1 Cartulary of S. Frideswide, folio 493. It may be noticed that there is no rubric
of this kind in regard to the parishes of S. Martin, S. Ebbe, S. Mary Magdalen, or
S. Mary the Virgin. Though the monastery had property in each parish the com-
piler has not thought it necessary to add any introductory notice. As the head
rubric to S. Giles' Parish there is the reference to one hyde of land in Walton in the
Parish of S. Giles, ' as appears above in the foundation, &c.'
288 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Danish incursions, and in the time of Cnut, i. e. 1030, the remains
were translated to S. Augustine's Monastery at Canterbury. A monk
of that monastery, named William Thorn, who compiled a chronicle
c. 1390, has preserved to us an account of the translation, with
details showing in what high veneration S. Mildred was held. Thorn
begins by reciting a charter of King Cnut, which grants the body of
S. Mildred to S.Augustine, which is supposed to be dated 10271. He
then, to all appearance copying the register, gives exact dates first when
Abbot Elstan translated the body of S. Mildred, viz. on the 15 Kalends
of June (May 18), 1030, to his monastery, and buried it in front of
S. Peter's altar ; and next when Abbot Wulfric, on enlarging his church
translated it again into S. Augustine's Chapel (porticus)> viz. on the
Eve of S. Leonard's Day (Nov. 5), 1037. Still, writing evidently from
the register, he notes that when Eadward [the Confessor] succeeded, in
1043, the same year he confirmed all that King Cnut had done as
to the Manor of Minster 2.
William of Malmesbury, writing c. n 25, bears testimony also to the
honour in which S. Mildred was held after her remains were trans-
lated in 1030. He writes : —
1 Mildritha dedicating herself to a life of celibacy, came to the end of
her days [at Minster] in the Isle of Thanet in Kent, which King Egbert
had given to her mother In after years, when she was trans-
lated to the monastery of S. Augustine at Canterbury, she was
honoured with exceeding assiduity on the part of the monks, the fame
of her piety and that of her gentleness towards all (as her name implies)
being equally thought worthy of their praise. And although almost
all the winding passages throughout that monastery are filled with the
bodies of saints, and those neither of slight fame or merit, and any of
which would be sufficient to shed lustre over England, yet than none
1 ' Notum sit vobis omnibus me dedisse Sancto Augustino Patrono meo, Corpus
Sanctae Mildredae, gloriosae virginis cum tota terra sua infra insulam de Thanet et
extra,' &c. Printed in Decern Scriptores 1652, col. 1783. It is possibly an early
forger)', but based on documents then in possession of the Monastery, and valu-
able so far for historical purposes.
2 Decern Scriptores, cols. 1 783-1 784, Thorn, under the year 1 262, when he men-
tions the final translation of the body into the shrine in which it now lies, gives a
full account of S. Mildred. There are some earlier notes relating to the life of the
saint compiled by Goscelin in the eleventh century ; additional material relating
to S. Mildred is also given in the chronicle of Thomas of Elmham, who wrote
somewhat later than Thorn, but has preserved copies of many older documents.
See Historia Monast. S. Augustini Cantnaricnsis, Rolls Series 1858, pp. 215, 217,
225, 289, &c. Capgrave devotes several pages to the expansion of the biographical
details of the life of this saiut.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVE Y. 289
is she less honoured, and at the same time she is more tenderly beloved
and remembered than all V
Before the date of this translation no churches would be dedicated
in her honour, but either in Cnut's time or early in Eadward the Con-
fessor's time there would be, on account of the popularity of the saint,
a reason for a church being dedicated to her ; and as King Cnut appears
to have been instrumental in the erection of S. Martin's Church here,
it might be argued that he founded S. Mildred's Church also. Were
it not for the chance preservation of the single charter in the Abingdon
Chronicle, we should have known nothing of S. Martin's Church, as
the Domesday Survey is absolutely silent with respect to it ; and since
all records belonging to S. Frideswide have been lost, and no records
of the churches founded by individuals were kept, there is no reason to
expect any mention of the foundation to exist. On the other hand,
it must be admitted that though dedications to English saints may have
gone out of fashion, still there is no reason whatever why some bene-
factor in Oxford, after the eleventh century, may not have, for particular
reasons, either from being a native in the Isle of Thanet, or connected
with S. Augustine's, thought proper to dedicate his church to this saint.
Five churches only however are known to have been dedicated in
her honour. One at Canterbury, one at Preston near Wingham in
Kent, two in London, and one at Whippingham in the Isle of Wight.
That at Canterbury was perhaps erected soon after the translation of
the relics. Very little of the original structure remains, but sufficient
to show that a church had stood there of a date anterior to the twelfth
century 2. Preston lies half-way between Minster and Canterbury, in
a direct line, and would possibly be the place where the body rested
on its way. Of the two churches in London, one is in Bread Street,
the other is in the Poultry 3 ; it is needless to say that no early remains
exist ; moreover, no record has been observed which implies an early
foundation. Of Whippingham also data are wanting 4 on which to base
1 William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, Liber II. § 215, Eng. Hist.
Soc. 1840, vol. i. p. 369. Appendix A, § 102.
2 There seems to be no reference to it in the numerous documents and chronicles
relating to Canterbury except in a MS. in C. C. C. C. (Miscell. G. p. 307), De
Ecclesiis fundatis ante adventum Normannorum in Angliam. In this occurs,
' In australi parte civitatis infra muros abbatia in honore beate Mildrithe statuitur
cujus ultimus abbas Alfwicus.' Printed in Dugdale, ed. 1846, vol. i. p. 128. This
seems to bear out what the remaining portions of ancient structure suggest.
8 They are thus referred to in the names of the city benefices 31 Edw. I:
'Sancta Mildreda in Poletria cum Capella de Conehop. Sancta Mildreda in
Bredstrate.' Munimenta Gildhallae Londoniensis, Rolls Series i860, p. 229.
4 It appears, however, to have been granted by William Fitz Osborne to the
Abbey of Lire soon after the Conquest. The present structure is modern.
U
290 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
any theory as to its erection. No remains whatever of S. Mildred's
Church in Oxford are in existence; it is believed that the very
foundations have been dug up, and that no evidence remains by
which the exact site can be traced. Allowed to go to ruin in the
later years of the fifteenth century, both Exeter College and Lincoln
College have taken in portions of the churchyard, the pathway across
which, being a public way, survives in Brasenose Lane. On the whole
therefore the church of S. Mildred may have existed in the eleventh
century, but may not have existed till the twelfth.
If S. Eadward's Church is dedicated to S. Eadward the Martyr *, who
was assassinated in 979, the date may be carried back to a time before
the Conquest ; for in the reign of King Cnut his remains 2, so at least the
Abingdon folk claim, were translated to that monastery. As in the case
of the translation of the relics of S. Mildred, such would be a more
likely time for the dedication, and whether the Abingdon claim, or
that of Glastonbury, or that of Shaftesbury, be the just one, the fact
of the statement that his remains were brought to this neighbourhood,
would be sufficient to suggest a church being dedicated in his honour at
the time. Still the data are not sufficient to warrant any satisfactory
conclusion ; and when it is remembered that the church may perhaps
be, after all, dedicated to Eadward the Confessor s, it must be admitted
that there is no evidence for or against the foundation of the church
having taken place before or after the Domesday Survey.
The site of the church, like that of S. Mildred, is wholly obliterated.
It was situated between the High Street and the northern boundary
wall of S. Frideswide's, and the parish would therefore have been to the
south of All Saints' parish, with which in the fifteenth century it appears
to have been incorporated.
Contrasted with the full details we have of the parentage and life of
S. Mildred, the name of S. Aldate presents considerable difficulty.
No early writer seems to have known this saint. In no ancient
1 So Antony Wood apud Peshall, p. 116. But no reference is given. Through-
out numerous charters, entries in the Hundred Rolls, &c, &c, no single instance
has been observed in which anything more than the name 'Eccl. Sancti Ed-war dV
is found.
-' Chron. Mm. Ab., vol. i. p. 443. In the list of the relics (ibid. ii. p. 157) they
are entered, ' De Sancto Eadwardo pars plurima.' The story adopted by nearly all
the martyrologists is that his remains, after reposing for a time at Wareham, were
translated to Shaftesbury. We note the date of the translation (June 20) still in
our Prayer Books.
3 It may be mentioned that it is impossible to distinguish between the dedica-
tions of the churches of S. Eadward throughout the country as to which belong
to the Martyr and which to the Confessor.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY. 2 9 1
martyrologies or calendars does the name appear. The fanciful
identification with the imaginary Eldad of Geoffrey of Monmouth's
romance does not seem to have been definitely suggested till the
seventeenth or at the earliest till the sixteenth century.
The story of Hengist meeting Vortigern and giving the watchword
of ' Nemet oure Saxas,' is well known ; and how four hundred and sixty
barons and consuls {barones et consules) of the British were slain ; and
how ' the blessed Eldad buried their bodies with Christian burial in the
cemetery which was near the monastery of Abbot Ambrius V This is
supposed, of course, to have taken place soon after the landing of Hen-
gist and Horsa, given in the Chronicle under the year 449. Elsewhere
Eldad is called by Geoffrey Episcopus Claudiocestrensis 2, and said to be
brother of Eldol, consul of Gloucester, who did such valiant deeds on
the battle-field against the Saxons. All this, inclusive of the names, is
pure invention, and of a very weak sort even for the twelfth century, so
far as the writer was actuated by the desire to pass his fiction off for
history. Still he succeeded, strange as it may appear, and a church
dedicated to a British bishop being too good a point to be lost, we
have the dedication of the church neatly introduced by Antony a Wood
as an argument to prove the antiquity of the church.
1 Concerning the first foundation of which [i. e. S. Aldate's Church]
it is very ancient ; if we regard to whom it was dedicated, and whose
name it bears, a British saint, about 450, as Leland says3, and whose
feast, as another author observes, was used to be kept at Gloucester
4th February. Through his means it was that Hengist, King of the
Saxons 4,' &c.
The first time we hear of S. Aldate's Church, apart from the sup-
posed Confirmation Charter of Henry the First, is in the Abingdon
Chronicle. The story, which is a very singular one, belongs to the
next century, but, on account of the light it throws upon that charter,
it must be briefly referred to here. The chronicler introduces it thus : —
1 Galfredi Monumetensis Historia, vi. 15, ed. Giles, 1844, P- 1J3*
2 Ibid. viii. 7, p. 137.
3 But does Leland say so ? The reference is ' Com. in Cygneam cantionem sub
voce C This must mean the word Claudia where Leland is justifying his use of the
word Claudia for Gloucester by referring to ' Nennius Britannus,' and ' Annates
Britannorwnl which are only later forms of Geoffrey of Monmouth. He simply
writes, ' Annales Britannorum referunt olim sedem hie fuisse episcopalem antisti-
temque habuisse Eldadum,' and nothing more (see Leland's Itinerary, Hearne's ed.
1744, vol. ix. p. 49). But it is not only useful to note the imperfect reference and
misstatement, but also the fact that Leland, whose Cygnea Cantio relates so much
to Oxford, had seemingly never heard of the suggestion that the church opposite the
entrance gate of St. Frideswide had as yet been connected with the imaginary
British Bishop.
* Antony a Wood. Apud Peshall, 1773, p. 144.
U %
292 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
* There is in the city of Oxford a certain minster {monasterium)
dedicated in honour of S. Aldad Bishop. Two clerks (clerici) of the
said town, Robert and Gilbert, brothers, share the whole benefice
equally with a certain Nicholas a priest1.'
It appears that the two brothers had taken the monk's habit at
Abingdon in the time of Abbot Ingulph. Nicholas made a bargain
thereupon with Abingdon that he was to hold the said brother's
moiety as well as his own, paying Abingdon twenty shillings per
annum as long as he lived ; if he died as he was (viz. an ordinary
priest), his moiety should, with the other, go to Abingdon ; if he took
a religious habit he should not go to any other house than Abingdon.
He was taken ill suddenly in Oxford, and sent word of his illness to
Abingdon; the brothers delayed to come; when in extremis the
canons of S. Frideswide put on him their habit, and so the moiety
was lost to Abingdon, and gained by S. Frideswide. This is the
bare outline of the story, and it shows how S. Frideswide obtained
that moiety which the charter of Henry the First confirms to them.
But when did this take place ? Ingulph was Abbot of Abingdon 1 130-
11 58, and he is recorded to have received the two brothers. It must
therefore have been some time after 11 30, even supposing he had
received them immediately on his accession, for between the brothers
taking the habit and the death of Nicholas, some time elapsed (to
quote the exact words ' deflnente vero aliquanto tempore '). Henry the
First, in whose reign the charter confirming the moiety to S. Frides-
wide professes to be granted, died 1135. So far it would be just
possible, provided the charter was given quite at the end of Henry's
reign, for it to be genuine. But incidentally at the last moment,
before the death of Nicholas, the Abbot of Oseney is called in, by
name Wigod. So far as can be ascertained he did not become Abbot
until 1 1 38. This makes it impossible that S. Frideswide could have
obtained the moiety of S. Aldate's in Henry's reign, and therefore, in
that particular at least which can be tested, the charter is false, and it
1 Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series, ii. p. 174- Wood aPud peshall comments
upon this in a curious way ; thus, 'Est in civit. Oxenford Monasterium quoddam
S. Aldati episcopi venerationi consccratum. This charter was wrote in King
Rufus' time; by which it is evident this church at that time was a monastery or
cloister to receive monks, or other devoted persons, to be prepared or trained up
for the above religious houses, viz. S. Frid and Abcndon Monasteries ' (Peshall,
p. 145). The passage he quotes is not a charter; as will be shown it is not of
William Rufus' time, but relates to events which could not have taken place before
Stephen's reign ; and as to the 'monastery' as a preparatory cloister to others, the
word minster is often used simply in the sense of a church with a priest or priests
attached. S. Martin's Church in Cnut's Charter is called nwnasteriolum (see
ante, p. 164).
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 293
tends to throw a doubt, of course, over other particulars which cannot
be tested. Ingulph lived on till 1158, that is, well into Henry the
Second's reign, and any time before that date the two brothers might
have been received and have given their moiety to Abingdon1; Wigod
continued Abbot of Oseney, so far as can be ascertained, till 1168, and
any time therefore before that date the death of Nicholas may have
taken place, and S. Frideswide have obtained their moiety. If there-
fore the charter is of the time of Henry the Second there is nothing
to be said against it, and there is an error in the rubric; but it is so
connected with the one 2 declaring the grant of this property to have
been confirmed by the Empress Matilda, in 1142, that some caution
should be exercised in accepting this explanation.
But then there is nothing proved as to the antiquity of the church
itself. The two brothers, Robert and Gilbert, might have succeeded
to or purchased one moiety of the benefice, and Nicholas the other.
Had they been the founders of the church the probabilities are that
they would not have been referred to by the chronicler in the manner
in which he writes. We are therefore thrown back into an obscurity
in regard to the origin of the church, just as absolute as in regard
to the life of the saint to whom it was dedicated.
That there are many saints of whom we find nothing recorded, and
whose names exist only in the churches dedicated after them, is true ;
but though this is common enough in Cornwall and Wales, and
somewhat so in the north, it is not the case of the churches lying in
the midland and southern counties, and the suggestion is somewhat
forced on the mind that the name Aldate (as it is most commonly
found written) is that of no saint at all.
One church, and one church only, is known to be so called, namely
a church at Gloucester. There seems to be little or no record
remaining which throws any light upon its origin 3. There is, how-
ever, this one point in common between the two, namely, that they are
each situated just within one of the four town gates ; that at Gloucester
just within and a little to the left on entering the old north gate of the
1 As the moiety is mentioned in the Privilegium of Pope Eugenius III. granted to
Abingdon in 1146, their reception of the brothers and acquisition of their moiety
must have taken place either at or before that date.
2 See ante, p. 285, note 1.
3 In the Cartularium Monasterii S. Petri Gloucestriae, Rolls Series 1863-67,
where one would expect to find at least some references to S. Aldate's Church,
amongst the other churches, the name is not even mentioned. The Priory of
Deerhurst is entered as having a portion in the Church of S. Aldate in Gloucester
in the Taxatio Papae Nicholai, made c. 1291, and this is the earliest instance of
the name which has been observed.
294 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
town, that at Oxford just within and on the left on entering the old
south gate of the town. It may be added that on one old map of
Gloucester and in another old map of Oxford they are inscribed ' St.
Aldgate's Church V
The calling of a church after its position as well as after the saint
to which it is dedicated, is not uncommon. In London it was often
necessary to have a second name, and so in the list of benefices
taken 31 Edward I. (1303), nearly all have such. We find, for
instance, Sancti Botulphi extra Bisschopesgate, Sancti Botulphi apud
Billingesgate, Sancti Botulphi de Alegate, Sancti Botulphi de Aldres-
gate V &c. It is therefore quite possible that the two churches, one in
Oxford and one in Gloucester, had originally some designation of this
kind. Supposing at Oxford the church had been called St. Martin at
Aldgate, it might have been shortened, just as St. Martin's at Carfax is
commonly called in conversation Carfax Church ; and were it not for
written documents the name of this dedication would thus very likely
have been lost. In the state of things at the Conquest it is quite pos-
sible that the church was called the Aldgate Church, and the Normans
thought Aldgate (or as it was softened Aldate) to be the name of a saint 8.
There is, of course, no written evidence of this, for if the original name
before the Conquest had been enrolled in documents it would not have
been forgotten, and the error would not have happened. All that can
be said is that this view is as probable as that a church in Oxfordshire
should be dedicated in the eleventh or twelfth century to a saint
utterly unknown, and of which, amidst the numerous martyrologies,
no writer should ever have attempted a history. One thing may be
taken as certain, and that is, it was not originally dedicated to the
fanciful Eldad 4 of Geoffrey of Monmouth, since his romance was not
1 Hall and Pinnell's map of the city of Gloucester, 1780, and Longmate's map
of Oxford, 1773, which accompanies Peshall's edition of Antony a Wood. In
Speed's map of Gloucester it is curiously spelt St. Aldame's.
2 Munimenta Gildhallac Londoniensis, Rolls Series 1S60, vol. ii. pp. 228-30.
Sometimes the names are singular ; for instance, Sancti Nicholai Aldrethegate ad
Macellas, Sancti Nicholai Olof (and this occurs elsewhere as S. Nicholai Bernard
Olof), Sanctae Mariae de Eldemariechirche, &c.
3 There is room for suspicion that the Est-rig-hoiel (? Est-bricg-hoiel) on the
first folio of the Gloucestershire Domesday (fol. 162 a, col. 1), where the Castcllum
was built by William, was corrupted to S. Briavels, and hence was the origin of
that saint's name.
* By the Abingdon chronicler writing ' Aldad Bishop' it looks almost as if he
had in his mind Geoffrey of Monmouth's Eldad of Gloucester. He had evidently
read the romance, as in the beginning of his chronicle he speaks of Bnitas, of
Faganus and Divianus, and of the burial of Lucius at Gloucester, &c. In the
charters the name is written simply Ecclcsia Sancti Aldad or Aldathi.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 295
issued till 11 25 and a previous existence of the church is implied.
In all early cases the first syllable is Aid, and when we find corrup-
tions in later times it is S. Olds or S. Tolds x ; no trace of S. Eldad
ever having been written exists.
Thus much then for three churches out of the eight which are
mentioned for the first time in the somewhat doubtful charter as con-
firmed to S. Frideswide's Monastery. It has been thought that such
dedications as S. Mildred and S. Eadward belong rather to the times
when S. Aebba, the sister of S. Oswald2, was chosen by the com-
munity at Ensham as the saint in whose memory to dedicate their
church; and this may be so ; and if S. Aldate is a corruption of Aldgate,
as has been suggested, the fact would still point to a church having
been in existence on the spot sometime before the close of the eleventh
century.
Of the remaining five churches, namely All Saints'; another S. Peter's,
another S. Michael's, and a chapel dedicated to the Holy Trinity
close to the east gate, and one to S. Clement on the other side of
the river Cherwell, nothing can be said which points to their being of
an earlier date than the twelfth century, nor on the other hand that they
were founded afterwards. The buildings themselves offer no remains
whatever. All Saints', and S. Peter's in the Bailey of the Castle, were
entirely rebuilt from the ground in the eighteenth century, and the
latter of the two re-erected on another site in the nineteenth century,
while the little chapel of S. Clement's, which gave way to a four-
teenth century church, standing just on the other side of Magdalen
bridge, and in the middle of the eastern road out of Oxford, as S.
Mary Magdalen's stood in the middle of the northern road, was wholly
cleared away at the beginning of this century, and another church
erected in the fields. Of Trinity Chapel, and of the other S. Michael's,
even the exact sites may be said to be unknown, and it is not clear
whether the latter was built over the gate or adjoining to it.
1 In the English version of the Oseney Chartulary before referred to (p. 207),
amongst the signatures to a charter dated 1226 there is one translated 'Reginald
Chapelyn of ye church of Seynte Oolde of Oxford' (folio 14 b).
2 Beda, Hist. Eccl. Lib. IV. cap. 19, mentions her as the abbess of Colclingham.
She died in 683. It is Florence of Worcester who supplies the name of her
parents {Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 533). At the same time the martyrologists seem to
have mixed up two stories together in the lives they write of this saint. There was
another St. Ebba an abbess of Coldingham who lived in the ninth century, when
her house was attacked by the Danes. It is impossible to say to which of these the
monks of Ensham intended to dedicate their church. One other church in Oxford-
shire, namely Shelswell (now destroyed), was dedicated in her honour, and also
Ebbchester in Durham. No others are known.
296 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
There is another church of which the name may be thought to carry
the foundation back as far at least as the eleventh century, namely, that
of S. Budoc. It does not seem to have been under the charge of any
monastery, or we should have probably learnt something more about
it. The chief references definitely to the church itself are in the early
part of the thirteenth century. In 1206 we find that William the
chaplain of Oxford has letters of presentation directed to the Lord
Bishop of Lincoln for the church of S. Budoc in Oxford1. Later on
we learn the story how, during the Barons' wars, the church being in
the way of the fortifications of the castle, the King had it pulled down,
but Henry III. rebuilt it apparently on another site 2. There are how-
ever one or two incidental references to houses in S. Budoc's parish
in the twelfth century amongst the Oseney charters from King-
Stephen's reign onwards.
To the question as to who S. Budoc was, no very satisfactory
answer can be given. It is easy to imagine some Cornish saint after
whom S. Budoc's or Buddock near Falmouth 3, and S. Budeaux (in
Devonshire) near Plymouth4 are supposed to be named, yet no reason
could be well assigned for a church in Oxford being dedicated to a
Cornish saint. If the name had been S. Judoc, the saint of Brittany who
died about 658, and was much honoured in some parts of Normandy
and in Picardy at this time5, it would have been easy to have imagined
that some of the Conqueror's followers erected a little church outside
the West gate, either for travellers arriving in that direction, or for the
population which had sprung up outside the town in that part. As it
is, we must perhaps fall back upon the obscure Cornish saint, who
seems to be known only from the two places which appear to bear his
1 Rotuli Literarum Patentium, anno 70 John, Memb. 7. The writ is dated,
apparently at Easing by the king, May 6, 1206.
2 Rotuli Literarum Clausarum, 6° Henry III, Membs. 10 and 3, and 7°,
Membs. 21 and 7.
3 ' And thus within the space of half a mile I cam to S. Budocus Church. This
Budocus was an Irisch man and cam into Cornewalle and ther dwellid.'— LelancTs
Itinerary, Hearne's ed. vol. iii. p. 14.
4 ' A four mile upper a creke going up to Mr. Budokes side where is his Manor
Blace and S. Budok Chirch ' (ibid. Hearne's ed. vol. iii. p. 30)- Wood aPud Peshall,
p. 29S, refers to Oudoceus (which he spells Budoceus), the son of a king of Brittany
whom' Godwin gives as Bishop of Llandaff circa 560. Also to a certain Bodo. As
to Budic, or Budec, Geoffrey of Monmouth (Bk. vi. cap. 8) introduces the name
into his story as a king of Brittany who received Aurelius, Ambrosius, and Uter
Bendragon when they escaped for fear of being killed by Vortigern, but he does not
name Budoc.
5 Orderic Vital, one of the chief historians of this time, devotes several pages to
a life of S. Budoc. His monastery of S. Evroult had acquired the old church
where his relics were preserved, and they had been twenty-four years at the time of his
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVE Y. 297
name. The church does not now exist, and even the exact site can-
not be identified1, while the parish has been wholly absorbed by
S. Ebbe's. So that whether it existed before the close of the eleventh
century, or did not come into being till the twelfth, there are no means
of ascertaining.
And there is a possibility of still another church having been in
existence before the close of the century, and that is S. Cross.
We have no mention of the church in records as existing in the
eleventh century, and only indirectly in the twelfth, but there is an
architectural feature belonging to the church, namely the old chancel
arch, which speaks, as plainly as the records, of a date, certainly very
early in the twelfth, and probably in the eleventh, when the structure was
erected. The Domesday Survey mentions S. Peter's Church, and that
alone as existing in Robert D'Oilgi's manor; hence it may fairly be
argued that at that time the church was not built ; but then it must be
remembered that Robert D'Oilgi lived some three or four years after
the Survey was made, and there were still nine or ten years to the end
of the century, during which time, as the population on Holywell
manor increased, his brother Nigel, or perhaps his heir, Robert D'Oilgi
the younger, who later on was so munificent to Oseney Abbey, would
have gone on with work which was begun, and would not have allowed
those outside the wall no more than those within to be long without
a church. Still it must be remembered that the evidence rests upon
a single architectural feature, and that though this points to a date
within the eleventh century, it is to one quite at the close of it.
There is little to be said beyond what has been already said as to
the streets. It is not till late in the twelfth century that we begin to find
them called by name. Early in that century, for instance, we find the
following reference to a house which had belonged to the manor of
Tadmarton, which was situated ' in via scilicet qua itur a Sancti
writing (i. e. 11 16) in rebuilding it. At the same time the Hyde Abbey Chronicle
declares that the relics were brought over in 903 to the new minster at Winchester.
S. Judoc's father was a king of Brittany, and it may be that Geoffrey of Monmouth
took his name of Budec from Judoc, and it is quite possible that a confusion arose
in the nomenclature, though in the ordinary change of words Judocus would not
get into Budocus.
1 The most probable site was in the angle formed by the road which skirted the
castle ditch on the southern side and the stream, since in one of the Oseney charters
reference is made to a property extra portam occidentalem, in Parochia S. Budoci.
If it stood in the middle of this road, as S. Mary Magdalen Church stood, it would
have been in the way of fortifying the castle on this side, and Falk de Breaute, who
had not much respect for churches, would have demolished it when he was
preparing the castle against siege.
2y«S THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Michaelis ecclesia ad casiettum! This was practically what is now
represented by New-Inn-Hall Street, but was part of that continuous
street which went all round the town within the walls. By degrees
this road was gradually blocked. As early as Henry the First's
reign, and when Bishop Roger of Salisbury was chancellor (1101-3),
if we can trust the Frideswide Charters, the king grants to them the
way which goes along the wall of the city of Oxford, so far as their land
reaches, and that they may enclose the said way, and that they may
close or obstruct all the entrances of the whole of their priory, &c.x
In the next century (1244) the Grey Friars were allowed to enclose
the inner road for a considerable distance, in another part of the
southern wall in St. Ebbe's parish 2. And so it was continued, some-
times small portions being enclosed by individuals, sometimes large
portions being enclosed by colleges, e. g. Merton, Exeter, and New,
until now only here and there traces of such a street are left.
The four streets meeting in the centre must have existed, but we do
not know how they were called ; and it is not till we come to the charters
of the Abbeys of S. Frideswide, Oseney, &c, of the twelfth century, and
mainly of the latter part of that century, that we find any reference to
the streets into which the central part of the city was divided.
It has already been mentioned that Robert D'Oilgi built the bridge
at the western approach to Oxford on the north of the Castle bridge,
i. e. the Hythe Bridge 3. It is probable that before the century closed
the south bridge was in existence. The evidence is briefly this : — In
the time of Abbot Faritius, who became Abbot of Abingdon in 1 100,
a certain house in Oxford, called the Wick, which was left to Ermenold,
is described as ljuxta pontem Oxeneford*; and later on, in the time of
Abbot Ingulph (1 130-1558), when it is let on lease5, it is again so
described. Of course it is possible that the bridge may have been
built in the early years of Abbot Faritius, or the house may have had
that name given to it afterwards, the chronicler calling it by the new
name in order to identify it ; still the more reasonable view perhaps is,
that the bridge was in existence. A later reference, i.e. after the
1 ' Praetcrca do eis viam juxta murum civitatis Oxeneford quantum extenditur
terra coruni ; et volo quod praedicti canonici eandem viam includant, et concedo
quod iidem canonici claudere possint omnes portus totius prioratus,' &c. Rotuli
Lit. Pat. Hen. V. Memb. 3. Per Inspeximus.
3 Printed in Dngdale, vol. viii. p. 1525. 3 See ante, p. 218.
4 Chron. Mon.Ab. vol. ii. p. 140.
5 Ibid. p. 1 76. Another entry occurs respecting a certain Langford Mill, which
is described as *apud Pontem Oxeneford posituvP (Ibid. p. 123), and which was
given during the time of Abbot Faritius. It does not however seem to refer to
this bridge, but there are difficulties in identifying the spot.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SUR VE V. 299
death of Abbot Roger, 1184, when a schedule is drawn out of the
property of the abbey, with the dates when the payments to it are due,
we find under rents from Oxford those from iij messagia supra pontem
australem ; i. e. it has here the name of the south bridge \
And after mentioning the bridges, the mills should not be omitted.
There was the mill, which is mentioned in the Survey, namely, the
Castle Mill ; and there is no reason to doubt but that it occupied the
same site as it does now, and portions of the masonry of the founda-
tions, and by which the rush of water is regulated, may well be of
a date anterior to the Conquest, for it will be observed that Earl
Aelfgar held the mill T. R. E.2 Incidentally it is noticed in Domesday
that, besides this mill, Robert D'Oilgi had one worth ten shillings 3,
which by implication was in his manor of Holywell. It must have
occupied the site of the present Holywell Mill, being supplied with
water from the Cherwell. Although the charter relating to the property
of Ensham, wrhich mentions the mills, is not earlier than the year 1109,
it is a confirmation charter, and bears internal evidence of referring to
property which had been some time previously in the hands of the mon-
astery; and as we see by the Domesday Survey they already possessed
their church and several houses which appear to be connected with the
church, we may fairly conclude that they already possessed these mills
also, and therefore two more may be added to the list of mills, which
may be supposed to be supplying the inhabitants of Oxford with flour
at this time. It is perhaps dangerous to fix on any particular spots
for the two mills, but we may presume that they were in or near to
St. Ebbe's parish. There are several divergences in the stream between
the Castle and Folly Bridge, and any of these would serve as a site for
a mill. In all probability, the mill which afterwards bore the name of
Trill Mill, the stream of which is now covered over for a greater part
of its course, and is filled up or much diverted for the remainder4, was
1 Chron. Mon. Ab. vol. ii. p. 332. The words probably are not to be taken to
mean that the houses were built on the bridge, like the so-called Friar Bacon's
study was afterwards. Supra here means beyond the bridge. The bridge in
Edward the First's reign is usually called the Pons longus' or the Pons magnus,
the latter possibly a latinization of Grand-pount.
2 See ante, p. 223. 3 Ibid. p. 225.
4 The Trill Mill stream left the main stream on the west of what is now
Paradise Square, and flowing through meadows which are now covered thickly
with houses, it gave off (as shewn by the map of Agas and Loggan) a stream
running due south to the Thames, and parallel with the road to Folly Bridge.
On the west side, the main stream, after passing beneath the road some seventy
yards outside South gate, gave off another stream running parallel with the former,
but a little distance off, on the east side of the said road. A portion of the main
300 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
originally one of the Ensham mills. In the next century we find
Oseney with certain mills which Robert D'Oilgi's nephew had given
them, but there is no evidence of there being more than the four mills
above named actually in existence at the time of the Survey.
There is one feature which still remains to be noticed, and which
essentially connects the time of the Domesday Survey with our own.
It will have been observed that the last item in the Oxford list runs as
follows :
' All burgesses of Oxford have common of pasture without the wall
which pays bs. 8d.' l
That ' common of pasture ' remains the same, stretching itself
between Walton Manor on the east and the main stream of the river
on the west, and bounded on the north by Wolvercote. It would be
perhaps rash to say that during the eight hundred years which have
passed since this notice of it there have been no encroachments,
especially on the southern side where the Cripley meadows lie. But
still in substance it remains, and the rights of the freemen of Oxford
to have therein free pasture are still admitted ; above all it bears the
old English name of the ' Port Meadow.' Practically the chief duties
of the Reeve of the town (who is appointed annually by the Portmanni-
mot or Town Council) is to look after the well-being of this meadow,
and the interests of the freemen therein ; but by a perversity which it
is difficult to account for, instead of being called the Port-reeve, which
is his true name, he is always called the Shire-reeve ; still, in the title
of sheriff it is something to find a survival of a part of this ancient
officer's name, and in his work a part of his ancient duties; it is
something more to find the meadow itself still set apart for its ancient
purpose, and bearing the ancient name in which that purpose is
in a measure set forth.
Such then are the points respecting Oxford on which the few
scattered documents which we possess appear to throw any light.
The little which they tell us is very slight in proportion to the amount
which is left to conjecture ; but enough seems to be handed down to
show that Oxford, like most other towns, had suffered much during
the time that preceded the arrival of William the Conqueror, and
enjoyed comparative tranquillity afterwards. His rule, though at times
stream was continued evidently across Merton Fields by the side of what is now
the Broad Walk, and found its way into the Cherwell. Several small branches of the
river in the south-western part of Oxford have been filled up and built over during
the past century.
1 See ante, p. 225.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMESDA Y SURVEY. 301
perhaps harsh, was always firm, and he thereby probably prevented
harshness in others. So far as can be judged from the very few data
existing, his government as regards the town was based upon the
old English lines. There was a reeve appointed over the shire by the
King himself; and probably also a reeve either appointed or elected
over the town also. It is difficult from the few scattered passages in
which the Scire-reve or Vice-comes is mentioned, and from the omis-
sion in most cases of the names of the counties over which they
presided, to make even a list of the names of the sheriffs at this time ;
while of the names of the portreeves there is scarcely a trace.
In the charter in which King William greets Sawold, Scirefe, and
all his thanes in Oxfordshire1, we may presume we have the name of
the reeve of this county at the time of the Conquest. The document
probably belongs to the early part of William's reign, for the com-
munity at Westminster whom it concerns would have hastened to have
their property protected by royal charters. Sawold however is not
recognized as sheriff in the Oxford list, though the same Sawold was
apparently holding mansions in Oxford ; hence we may argue that he
had ceased to be sheriff by the time the Survey was taken. In that
list we have distinctly named Edward as the Sheriff2 ; but, as already
pointed out, it is a question whether this was Edward of Salisbury
who was sheriff of Wilts, or another Edward, who was sheriff of
Oxford. The latter seems the most probable, from the circumstances
that the charter respecting the grant of Ensham, which could have
nothing to do with Wiltshire, is witnessed by Edward the sheriff, and
Robert D'Oilgi together3. But in the list of the holders of Oxford
mansions occurs more than once the name of Alwin, or Alwi, and
under the ' Terra Mifiistrorum Regis,' we find that Alwi the sheriff
holds of the king two hydes in Bletchingdon4. We also find amongst
the Tenentes in capite in Oxfordshire that a Suain is entered as vice-
comes and that he held Baldon 5. If either of them was sheriff of Ox-
fordshire there is the difficulty of determining whether one succeeded
Edward, or the reverse. The balance of evidence perhaps would be
in favour of Edward (who was most likely a Norman) succeeding to
Alwi or Suain, who must have been Englishmen. Still, it must be
confessed that the data are insufficient for arriving at any very definite
1 See ante, pp. 270-71. 2 See ante, p. 246.
3 See ante, p. 242, and Appendix A, § 95, His signature also occurs in the
charter respecting Remigius, A, § 90.
4 See ante, pp. 257 and 266.
5 Domesday, fol. 160 a, col. 1. See also the list of Tenentes in capite shown as
the Frontispiece to this volume, No. xlii.
302 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
conclusion, since either Alwi, Suain or Edward might have been
sheriffs of some other county after all.
In William Rufus' reign, and presumably early in that reign, we find
several writs addressed to Peter the sheriff of Oxford. It may reason-
ably be suggested that, whether Alwi or Edward were holding the
office in William the Conqueror's reign, they gave way to Peter in the
reign of his successor. But he appears only to have held the office
during William Rufus' reign, since, when Abbot Faritius soon after
noo bought houses in Oxford, they are described as those of Peter
formerly sheriff1. Further than this, we find a writ dated in 1002 — that
is, early in Henry the First's reign — to William of Oxford and to William
the sheriff of Oxford 2. Hence it would seem that on the accession of
King Henry, Peter was for some reason, possibly political, superseded
and William put in his place.
As to the Port-reeve, it is curious that no mention is made of him in
the list of the Oxford tenants. Either he lived in one of the houses
of the ' Tenentes in Capite] or possibly his office was not recognized by
the Domesday Surveyor from it not being a crown appointment. One
instance however has been noted, and it is the only one, namely, where
the name of the Praeposiius Eadwi occurs in a writ issued by William
Rufus.
The writ runs as follows : —
William, King of the English to Peter of Oxford greeting.
Know that I will and command that abbot Rainald of Abingdon,
and the monks of his church, shall have and hold all their customs
every where and in every way as well and as honourably and as peace-
fully as they ever held them in the time of King Eadward, and in the
time of my father, so that no man shall henceforth any more do them
injury.
Witness Ranulf the Chaplain 3.
And take care that full right be done to the aforesaid abbot by Eadwi
your praepositus, and other of your servants who have done his monks
injury 4.
1 See ante, p. 264. 2 See ante, p. 265.
3 This must be Ralph Flammard (see ante, p. 255), to whom William Rufus
gave the bishopric of Durham in 1098, and who made such bad use of his power.
The following passage bearing upon the signature, ' Rannulph the Chaplain,'
occurs in the continuation of Simeon of Durham's history of Durham. ' Rex W.
dedit episcopatum Ranulfo qui propter quandam apud rcgem excellentiam
singulariter nominabatur capellanus Regis.' Apud Twysden, Decern Scriptores,
col. 59.
4 Chron. Mon. Ab. ii. p. 41. As to Eadwi being named in the Domesday list
in the Conqueror's reign see ante, p. 273. Appendix A, § 103.
DESCRIPTION OF OXFORD IN DOMES DA Y SURVEY. 303
The word praepositus seems generally to be used in the sense of
Port-reeve *, although at the same time it is used in the other senses
as well2.
We have no direct evidence that either William the Conqueror or
William Rufus ever visited Oxford. No charter has been observed
dated by either of those kings at Oxford ; but then the charters of
which copies are in existence are very few in proportion to the
number which must have been granted. The probability is that
the first William would visit the town to satisfy himself that the works
done at the Castle were sufficient, and this is strengthened by the
fact that we learn that he was frequently in the immediate neigh-
bourhood, though if we accept entirely the Abingdon chronicler's
statement, the two Williams, both father and son, preferred Abingdon,
as a place of sojourn, to Oxford. In speaking of the island called
Andres-ei, which adjoins the precincts of the monastery, and which
was celebrated from the circumstance that King OrTa, about the year
760, had taken up his abode there, and also King iEthelstan, the
chronicler writes : —
' And in this place King William the elder and his son King William
the younger after his father frequently chose to be lodged when they
passed through this district V
He then speaks of the manner in which he was entertained and the
pleasant aspect of the place, and goes on to speak of King Henry
and his queen Matilda.
It would seem too that Prince Henry was commanded by his father
to keep Easter there in the year 1084, Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury,
and Milo of Willingford, ' cognomento Crespin? being in attendance on
him, and the chronicler narrates the circumstance with a certain
feeling of satisfaction, inasmuch as he adds that Robert D'Oilgi
provided abundance of provisions not only for the table of the royal
party but also for those of the brethren of his monastery 4.
It was this Robert D'Oilgi whom the king had appointed to the
governorship of the castle and to whom was entrusted the military
control of the district. The titles given to him by the Abingdon
1 It is clearly so in the case of Godwin, one of the signatures to the charter
referred to p. 179. The original runs, ' Et Goduuinus praepositus civitatis Oxna-
fordi, et Wulfwinus praepositus comitis, et omnes cives Oxanfordienses.'
2 For instance, in the laws of King yEthelstan a hlaford may appoint a prae-
positus to protect his men (Thorpe, vol. i. p. 217). A praepositus of a hundred
also is found mentioned in William the Conqueror's laws (ibid. p. 469).
3 Chron. Mon. Ab. vol. ii. p. 49. * Ibid. p. 12.
304 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
chronicler, of Consiabularius and CaslcUi oppidanus, do not throw
any special light upon his official position ; no doubt he was practi-
cally governor over Oxford. There is no reason however to suppose
that Ik- was ill-disposed towards the city. Indeed the little that has
come down to us implies the contrary. He lived on into the reign
of William Rums ; as has been said, he was a benefactor to Abingdon,
as much as to Oxford, assisting in the rebuilding of their monastery,
and so eventually determined to be buried there1. He left no heir,
and Nigel D'Oilgi his brother succeeded to his barony. There
does not appear to be any reason for saying Nigel succeeded to him
in the office of governor of Oxford2. It is possible that Peter the
Sheriff was entrusted with the responsibilities hitherto belonging
to Robert D'Oilgi, as no name of a successor is found. In the
absence of any record to the contrary, it can only be supposed that
whoever it was he followed in the steps of his predecessor. Cer-
tainly it would appear that the next century saw Oxford regain its
old prosperity and advance beyond it, and that is perhaps the best test
of good government which the historian can expect to find. Besides,
so far as can be judged by the incidental reference to the legal pro-
ceedings which we possess, though they are mainly of the following
century, there was a disposition not only to give the people good laws
but to see that they were carried out, and though we learn but little of
the sheriffs, or the portreeves, who were responsible for the peace and
progress of the town, we may fairly presume they did their duty, and
that, compared with the state of things previously, Oxford had rather
to be thankful than otherwise for the Norman Conquest.
1 See ante, p. 215.
2 Kennett, in the Parochial Antiquities, vol. i. p. 102, speaks of him as ' Nigel
de Oily, constable of the castle of Oxford, and lord of the barony of Hook Norton,'
but the examination of some thirty or forty charters, either granted or signed by
him, affords no evidence that he held this position.
APPENDIX A.
Passages quoted in Chapter II. on the Mythical Origin of
Oxford.
§ i. Ex Johannis Rossi Historia Regum Angliae : fol. n a1.
(See p. 5.)
Circa haec tempora judicabat Samuel, dei servus, in Judaea. Habuitque
iste rex Magdan duos filios, videlicet Mempricium & Malun. Hie junior
proditorie a seniore interfecto monarchiam fratricidi reliquit. Erat vir
invidus & immisericordia plenus, &, juxta illud Proverbiorum lido. ' Iranon
habet misericordiam,' sic nee ipse, sed erat ipse contra omnes, & omnes
contra eum. Ipse Mempricius monarcha existens male intravit, pessime
proceres suos necando rexit. Tandem vicesimo regni sui anno a multitu-
dine rapidissimorum 2 luporum circumdatus miserime vitam finivit, ab ipsis
dilaceratus & devoratus. Nil boni de eo commemoratur, nisi quod pro-
bum filium & heredem generavit nomine Ebrancum 3, & unam nobilem
urbem condidit, quam a nomine suo Caer Memre nominavit, sed temporum
postea decursu Bellisitum, demum Caerbossa, tandem Ridohen, & ultimo
Oxonia, sive Oxenfordia, a quodam eventu de quodam vado vicino per
Saxones appellata est, quod nomen usque hodie retinet. Crevit ibi posteris
diebus nobile studium generate, ab inclita Universitate de Greklaad diri-
vatum. Situatur inter flumina Thamisie & Charwell ibi obviantia. Urbs
haec, sicut Iherusalem, ut apparet, est alterata. Nam mons Calverie
1 Hearne's edition, 1745, p. 21. This professes to be printed from a transcript
of the Cotton MS. Vesp. A. XII., made by Ralph Jennings, but compared with
another transcript made for Archbishop Parker, and preserved in the Library of
Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. The above passage and those which follow
have been read by the original MS., which is thus described in the Catalogue of
the Cottonian Library: ' Codex Memb. in 4to. constans foliis 147. Joannis Rossi
Warwicensis Historia a Bruto ad tempora Regis Henrici VII &c. ad nativitatem
principis Arthuri, anno 1486.' Hearne's foliation given in the margin seems to be
from the Cambridge copy. The folios given here are from the latest of the three
series of folios by which the Cottonian MS. has been foliated.
2 After 'rapidissimorum' the MS. has ' suorum,' which " has been struck
through.
3 Ebracu in MS.
X
3o6 the early history of oxford.
Christo passo crat juxta muros civitatis, & nunc infra murorum ambitum
continetur. Sic extra Oxoniam est modo quaedam larga planicies muris
ville contigua, & Belmount appellatur, quod sonat pulcher mons, & hoc
quodammodo cum uno dc antiquioribus nominibus urbis ipsius praenomi-
natis & prerecitatis, videlicet Bellisitum; unde opinantur multi, Universi-
tatero a Greklad ad ipsum Bellum montem, vel Bellesitum, translatum ante
adventum Saxonum Britonibus in insula regnantibus, et ecclesia Sancti
Egidii, sub nomine cujusdam alterius Sancti dedicata, erat locus creationis
graduatorum, sicut modo est ecclesia Sancte Marie infra muros. De
hac nobili Universitate plenius tangam cum pervenero ad tempora regis
Aluredi.
§ 2. Exjo/iannis Rossi Historia: fob 2 b1.
(See p. 6.)
De aliis civitatibus ante diluvium conditis tacet Moyses. Scribit tamen
egregius vir Bcrnardus de Breydenbach, decanus & camerarius Magunti-
nensis ecclesiae cathedralis, in Itinerario suo ad Terram Sanctam & ad
Sanctam Katerinam, quod ante diluvium Noe fuerunt octo nobiles urbes
condite in humanum praesidium contra diluvium illud Noe venturum,
quarum Joppe, alias Japha, erat una, sic nominata a Japhet, filio Noe, qui
earn construxit, & ex suo nomine earn appellavit, ubi & hodie vectes eciam
magni ex quadam rupe videntur pendere, quibus naves fuere affixe, &c.
§ 3. Ex Galfredi Monumetensis Historia: Lib. II. § 6 2.
(See p. 7-)
Tunc Samuel propheta regnabat in Judaea, et Silvius Aeneas adhuc
vivebat. Et Homerus clarus rhetor et poeta habebatur. Insignitus sceptro
Maddan, ex uxore genuit duos filios Mempricium et Malim. Regnumque
cum pace et diligentia quadraginta annis tractavit. Quo defuncto orta est
inter praedictos fratres discordia propter regnum : qui uterque totam
insulam possidere aestuabat Vigesimo tandem regni sui anno,
dum venationem exerceret, secessit a sociis in quandam convallem, ubi a
multitudine rabiosorum luporum circumdatus, miserrime devoratus est.
Tunc Saul regnabat in Judaea, et Eurystheus in Lacedaemonia.
§ 4. Ex Galfredi Monumetensis Historia: Lib. III. § 10 3.
(See p. 8.)
Habita ergo victoria remansit Brennius in Italia, populum inaudita
tyrannide afficiens, Belinus vero in Britanniam reversusest : et cum
tranquillitate reliquis vite suae diebus patriam tractavit. Renovavit etiam
aedificatas urbes ubicumque collapsae fuerant; et multas novas aedificavit.
Inter caeteras composuit unam super Oscam flumen prope Sabrinum mare,
1 Ilearne's edition, 1745, p. 3.
2 Galfredi Monumetensis Historia Britonum, edidit Giles, 1844, p. 26.
3 Ibid. p. 48.
APPENDIX A. 307
quae multis temporibus Kaerosc appellata est Fecit etiam in urbe
Trinovanto januam mirae fabricae super ripam Tamesis, quam de nomine
suo cives temporibus istis Belinesgata vocant.
§ 5. Ex Johannis Rossi His tor ia : fol. 13a1.
(See p. 8.)
Huic successit filius suus Bellinus, cujus frater Brennius condidit Bris-
tolliam, quasi Brend locum ; et iste Bellinus condidit urbem Legionum in
Cambria, & Byllnsgate apud London, et Danmarchiam sibi conquestu
subjugavit2.
§6. Ex Johannis Rossi Hisloria : fol. 14 a3.
(See p. 8.)
Condidit ipse Porcestriam, id est, Porchestre, prope Suthamptoniam, &
urbem Warwici, quae caput est provinciae circumjacentis, quae & Caerleon
est appellata secundum nostrum Gildam, virum diebus suis literatissimum
& moribus excellenter pollentem, magni regis Arturi praecipuum capel-
lanum.
§ 7. Ex Johannis Rossi Historia : fol. 13 b4.
(See p. 9.)
Et eorum principisfratrem Gantebrum nomine, Cantebre civitatis Hispaniae
verum heredem, secum retinuit, cui cum propria filia in uxorem dedit
portionem terrae in Estanglia, ubi, ut scribunt Cantebrigienses, civitatem
super flumen Cant condidit circa annum ab origine mundi M. M. M. M. CCC
xvii.5 et quia vir literatissimus erat viros literatos sibi collegit, ac sibi
studium generale incepit, quod nostris temporibus in magno floret honore.
Quae civitas a filio suo Grantino, qui pontem ibi fecerat, Caergrant appel-
lata vel Grauntcestre secundum alios, & modo appellatur Cambryge, & est
caput patriae circumjacentis.
§ 8. Ex Libro Cancellarii et Procuratorum 6.
(See p. 10.)
Translatio Universitatis de loco in locum.
Contestantibus plerisque chronicis, multa loca per orbis climata variis
temporibus variarum scientiarum studiis floruisse leguntur ; omnium autem
1 Hearne's edition, p. 25.
2 The words ' et Danniarchiam . . . subjugavit ' are written in the MS. in a
smaller hand, space having been left for them.
3 Hearne's edition, p. 26. 4 Hearne's edition, p. 25.
5 Space had been left for the date, but barely sufficient, so that it has been
written in afterwards in a smaller hand.
6 Printed in Munimenta cademica, ed. Anstey, 1868, Rolls Series, vol. ii.
p. 367. The text is that of the Chancellor's Book (a.) compiled c. 1375, com-
pared with that of the Proctor's Book (b.) written 1477, and with a still earlier
Proctor's Book (c), written 1407. The above has also been compared with a
fine transcript, presumably made for the private use of the Chancellor (m.), pre-
served amongst the Cottonian MSS. in the British Museum (Claudius D. VIII.),
and to which the date of 1411 may perhaps be assigned.
X %
308 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
inter Latinos nunc cxtantium studiorum Universitas Oxonicnsis fundatione
prior, quadam scientiarum pluralitate generalior, in veritatis Catholicae
professione firmior, ac privilegiorum multiplicitatc praestantior invenitur.
Prioritatem1 suae fundationis insinuant historiae Britannicae perantiquae:
fertur cnim inter bcllicosos quondam Trojanos, qui, cum duce suo Bruto,
insulam tunc Albion, postmodum Britanniam, ac demum dictam Angliam,
triumphaliter occuparunt, quosdam philosophos adventantes locum habita-
tionis sibi eongruae in ipsa insula clegisse, cui ct nomen videlicet Grckelade.
I idem philosophi, qui Graeci fucrunt, usque in praesentem diem quasi sui
vestigium reliquerunt. A quo quidem loco non longe municipium Oxoniae
noscitur esse situm, quod, propter amnium, pratorum et ncmorum adjacen-
tium amoenitatem, Bellesitum olim antiquitas, postmodum Oxoniam, a
quodam vado vicino sic dictam, populus Saxonicus nominavit, et ad locum
studii praeelegit.
Scientiarum quippe exuberantior pluralitas ibidem evidentius eo cernitur
quo in aliis studiis uni pluribusve 2 scientiis sic insistitur, ut tamen aut
plures, aut saltern earum aliqua3, videatur excludi ; Oxoniae vero singulae sic
docentur, ut scientia, quae illic respuitur, nullatenus licita censeatur.
§ 9. Ex Libro Monasterii de Ilyda : Cap. xiii. § 4 \
(See p. 13.)
Quae universitas Oxoniae quondam erat extra portam Borealem ejusdem
urbis, et erat principalis ecclesia totius cleri ecclesia sancti Egidii, extra
eandem portam ; modo vero est, intra muros urbis Oxoniae, et est ecclesia
principalis cleri, ecclesia Sanctae Mariae intra eandem urbem. Quae trans-
late facta est anno regni regis Edwardi tertii post Conquestum vicesimo
octavo; anno Dominicae incarnationis millesimo tricentesimo quinqua-
gesimo quarto. Cujus translationis causa fuit ista: Nam laid collecta
multitudine virorum, de patria convicina, in scholares atrocissime irruerunt,
et quosdam vulneraverunt, quosdam crudeliter peremerunt. Tandem,
more praedonum, bona scholarium diripientes, eos de villa fugere com-
pulcrunt ; propter quod Oxonia diu postea erat supposita ecclesiastico
interdicto. Sed demum, mediantibus regni magnatibus et eorum amicis,
pax inter eos tali pacto firmata est, ut cives Oxonienses, qui causas discor-
diae ministraverant, firmiter et perpetualiter obligarent se nunquam de
caetero scholaribus Oxoniensibus fore nocivos, vel eis laesionem aut injuriam
illaturos; regimenque totius villae cancellarius universitatis, qui pro tem-
pore fuit, et nullus alius saltern laicus in posterum obtineret.
1 Trout B. and C. Praestantior erased and Trout written above M.
,J De scientiis M. 3 Aliqua omitted M.
4 Printed from the edition of the Liber Monasterii de Ilyda, in Rolls Series,
8vo. Lond. 1866, p. 41. Edited by Edward Edwards from the unique MS.
in the Library of the Earl of Macclesfield.
APPENDIX A.
3°9
§ io. Ex fohannis Brompton Chron. {sive Chron. fornallensi):
fol. 36 b l.
(See p. 15.)
Unde circa idem tempus juxta quorundam opinionem, & vulgare anti-
quorum & modernorum dictum, creditur studium apud Grantecestre sedem
juxta Cantebrigiam a venerabili Beda esse fundatum : quod verisimiliter
credi potest, pro eo & ex eo, quod postmodum tempore magni Karoli
regis Franciae studium de Roma usque Parisius per quemdam Alquinum
Anglicum discipulum Bedae in omnibus scripturis exercitatum, legitur eciam
translatum esse, ut cito inferius plenius dicetur.
Item superius legitur, quod Erpwaldus rex Estanglie, filius regis Redwaldi
antequam factus fuerat rex, Gallia exulans, scolas ut ibi viderat, sancto
Felice episcopo se juvante, instituit puerorum. Sed secundum quosdam,
adhuc ante ista tempora fuerunt duo studia in Anglia, unum de Latino, &
aliud de Graeco, quorum unum Graeci posuerunt apud Greglade, quae modo
dicitur Kirkelade, et sic ibidem linguam Graecam pro tempore docuerunt.
Aliud »ero Latini posuerunt apud Latinelade, quae modo vocatur Lecchelade
juxta Oxoniam, linguam ibi Latinam docentes.
§11. Passages supposed to be by Leland supporting the mythical story
as to the existence of Oxford.
(See p. 16.)
Johannes item Leylandus in marginali quadam annotatione, quam scrip-
sit in Polydori Virgilii Anglicam historiam, quo loco idem Polydorus primam
Oxoniensis Academiae fundationem Alphredo ascribit, affirmat, se legisse
apud quosdam mirae vetustatis Britannicarum rerum scriptores, tempore
Britonum, tarn Graecas quam Latinas scholas ad vadum Isidis floruisse,
easque bellicis tumultibus deletas fuisse, & non ante Alphredi tempora in-
stauratas. Haec in codicis margine illius manu scripta habentur 2.
Idem (i.e. Lelandus) in annotatione Marginali in Polydorum, in hunc
modum : fuere tempore Brytonum ad ripas Isidis Graecae scholae et La-
tinae quarum nomina vel adhuc corrupte manent; quas, praeceptores
loci amoenitate ducti Calevam transtulerunt ubi pius Alfredus pristinis
sedibus literas restituit. Haec Lelandus 3.
Lelandus vero de utraque schola sic ait, nempe, veteres Britones duas
scholas habuisse tarn eloquentia quam omni literatura florentes; quarum
quidem una Greekelade a grecae linguae professione dicta est, altera vero
Latinlade a linguae latinae professione : verum nunc corrupte Crekelade &
Lechelade nomen est. Haec Lelandus apud Baleum in vita Regis Alphredi
Magni.3
1 Printed by Twisden, Hist. Angliae Decern Scriptores, London, 1652, col. 814.
From Cottonian MS., Tiberius CXIII, with which the extract has been compared.
2 From Assertio Antiquitatis Oxoniensis Academicae, Hearne's ed., p. 279.
3 From Bryan Twyne Antiq. Acad. Oxon Apologia, Oxoniae, 1608, p. 114.
310 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
§ 12. Ex Galfrcdi Monumdcmis Historia: Lib. X. cap. 4 l,
(See p. 17.)
Congregatis tandem cunctis quos expectaverat Arturus ; Mine Augusto-
dunum progreditur, ubi impcratorcm esse existimabat. Ut autem ad
Album fluvium venit, annunciatum est ei, ilium castra sua non longe posu-
isse, ct tanto incedere exercitu, quanto (ut aiebant) resistere nequiret.
Nee idcirco perterritus coeptis suis desistere voluit, sed super ripam flu-
minis castra sua metatus est, unde posset excrcitum suum libere condu-
cerc, et si opus esset, sese intra ea reciperc. Duos autem consules, Bosonem
Devadoboum et Guerinum Carnotensem, Walganium etiam nepotem suum
Lucio Tiberio direxit, ut suggerercnt ei quatenus recederet e finibus
Galliae, aut in postero die ad experiendum veniret, uter eorum majus jus
in Galliam haberet, &c.
(See p. 18.)
Tnvidit ergo Boso Devadoboum, quoniam tantam probitatem fecisset
Carnotensis : et retorquens equum suum, cui primo obviavit, ingessit 11 1 i
lanceam in tragulam, et letaliter vulneratum coegit caballum deserere, quo
eum insequebatur l.
(See p. 18.)
Cum igitur solennitas Pentecostes advenire inciperet, post tantum
triumphum maxima laetitia fluctuans Arturus, affectavit curiam ilico tenere,
regnique diadema capiti suo imponere. Reges etiam et duces sibi sub-
ditos ad ipsam festivitatem convenire : Praeterea gymnasium du-
centorum philosophorum habebat qui astronomia atque ceteris artibus
eruditi, cursus stellarum diligenter observabant, et prodigia eo tempore
ventura regi Arturo veris argumentis praedicebant Venerunt
nobilium civitatum consules, Morvid consul Claudiocestriae : Urgennius ex
Badone : Jonathal Dorocestrensis : Boso Ridocensis id est, Oxenefordiae'2.
(See p. 19.)
Eliminabit Claudiocestria leonem, qui diversis praeliis inquietabit sae-
vientem. Conculcabit eum sub pedibus suis, apertisque faucibus terrebit.
Cum regno tandem litigabit leo, et terga nobilium transcendet. Super-
veniet taurus litigio, et leonem dextro pede percutiet. Expellet eum per
regni diversoria: sed cornua sua in muros Oxoniae confringet3.
§ 13. Ex [Johannis Caii] De Antiquitate Cantab. Acadcmiae :
Libro I. cap. 1 4.
(See p. 21.)
Ceterum ad has discordias rumpendas atque finiendas, sanctamque
pacem componendam atque statuendam, quum neque Oxoniensis Canta-
1 Galfredi Monumctcnsis Historia Rritomun, edidit Giles 1844, pp. 184-5.
2 Ibid., Lib. ix. cap. 12, p. 170. : Ibid., Lib. vii. cap. 4, p. 127.
4 Printed from Hearne's edition, Oxon. 1730, p. 6.
APPENDIX A. 311
brigiensem, nee Cantabrigiensis Oxoniensem fert in controversia judicem,
quod pro sua cujusque affectione rem tractatum iri uterque judicat, ex
libidine magis quam ex vero celebratam existimat, res suasit et commise-
ratio jussit, ut ego homo Londinensis, medio loco inter utrumque positus,
et eodem animo in utrumque affectus cui longa triginta annorum absentia
a gymnasiis (nisi subinde invisendi gratia charitatis studio) omnem affectum
juvenilem in Gymnasia sustulit, hanc controversiam ut inutilem, imo vero
rem damnosam, tanquam communis amicus definirem ac componerem.
Etenim sic in animum induxi meum, boni viri officium atque partes esse
omnem litis ansam intercipere, dulcem pacem componere, atque alienas
simultates ut suas nee excitandas aut alendas esse existimare, et opportuni-
tate data aut extinguendas aut mitigandas esse, idque minimo motu si
maximas, nullo tumultu si periculosas sentiat.
§ 14. Oratio oratoris Cantabrigiensis coram Elizabethae Reginae
habita Nonis Augusti a. d. 1564 \
(See p. 25.)
* Superest adhuc (excellentissima princeps) cum posita sunt multorum
collegiorum incunabula, ipsa Academia nostra quando esse coepit, paucis
explicetur. Historia nostra scriptum est, a Gantabro quodam, Hispaniae
Rege, cum, domestico tumultu patria ejectus, in nostrum regnum appu-
lisset, Gurguntii temporibus fuisse exstructam. Hujus authores sententiae
Leylandus & vanitatis arguens & mendacii, Sigebertum Regem facit
Academiae nostrae conditorem, in quo perniciosum reliquit exemplum
nimis curiose in historias inquirendi, & sibi quoque parum consuluit. Nam
si ipse tarn multis non credat, mirabiliter in hoc conspirantibus, quis paulo
magis consideratus, ei soli fidem esse putabit adhibendam ? Sed sive ad
hunc, sive ad ilium authorem referatur, illud constat inter omnes, Oxoniensi
Academia nostram multis esse annis antiquiorem. Nam ilia ab Aluredo
Rege dicitur instituta, quern omnes sciunt & Gurguntio & Sigeberto aetate
multo fuisse posteriorem. Illud praeterea, ad magnam nostram gloriam,
omnes una voce testificantur historiae, Oxoniensem Academiam a Canta-
brigiensi doctiss. mutuatam esse qui prima ingenuarum artium incunabula
in suo gymnasio traderenL Parisiensem etiam, quasi Goloniam a nostra
Academia ductam, Alcuinum nostrum Bedae discipulum, a Carolo magno,
Gallorum Rege, magnis locupletatum beneficiis habuisse, qui discendi
cupidis quasi ludum quendam bonarum artium Lutetiae primus aperuerit.'
§ 15. Ex \Nicholai Cantalupi~\ His tor tola. De Origine Universitatis
Cantebrigiensis 2.
(See p. 35.)
Huic civitati rex Cassebalanus regni gubernaculum cum esset adeptus
talem praeeminenciam contulit ut quicunque fugitivus aut reus doctrinam
1 From the Assertio Antiquitatis Oxonicnsis Academia [Thomae Caii], as
printed in Hearne's edition, Oxon. 1730, p. 281.
2 Printed from Hearne's Appendix to Sprotti Chronica, Oxon. 1719, p. 265.
312 THE EARLY HISTORY OE OXFORD.
haurire desiderans ad cam confugcret, cum venia sine molcstia, improperio,
aut injuria coram inimico tucrctur. Cujus occasionc, & propter terrae
opulcnciam, acris mundiciam, & doctrinac habundanciam, & regis clemen-
ciam, illuc accesserunt juvencs & senes ex diversis terrae finibus, ex quibus
Julius Caesar habita de Cassebclano victoria secum adduxit Romam, ubi
postmodum floruerunt cloquiis.
§ 1 6. Ex Libro Monaster ii de Hyda: Cap. 13, § 41.
(See p. 45.)
Igitur anno Dominicae incarnationis octingentesimo octogesimo sexto,
anno secundo adventus sancti Grimbaldi in Angliam, inccpta est universitas
Oxoniae, primitus in eadem regentibus, ac in theologia legentibus sancto
Neotho, abbate necnon in theologia doctore egregio ; et sancto Grimbaldo,
sacrae paginae suavissimae dulcedinis excellcntissimo professore : in
grammatica vero et rhetorica regente Assero, presbytero et monacho, ac
in arte literatoria viro eruditissimo : in dialectica vero, musica, arith-
metica, legente Johanne, monacho Menevensis ecclesiae : in geometria et
astronomia, docente Johanne, monacho ac collega sancti Grimbaldi, viro
acutissimi ingenii et undecumque doctissimo ; praesente gloriosissimo et
invictissimo rege Alfredo, cujus in omni ore, quasi mel, indulcabitur
memoria, et totius regni sui clero et populo. Ubi idem rex prudentissimus
Alfredus tale decretum edidit, videlicet, ut optimates sui filios suos, vel si
filios non haberent, saltern servos suos, si ingenio pollerent, concessa libertate
literis commendarent. [Quae Universitas, &c]
§ 17. From Camden's edition of Asseri Annates, showing the
interpolated passage 2.
(See p. 46.)
Eodem anno [i.e. DCCCLXXXVI.] JElfred Angulsaxonum rex, post
incendia urbium stragesque populorum, Londoniam civitatem honorifice
restauravit, et habitabilem fecit ; quam genero suo jEtheredo Merciorum
comiti commendavit servandam, ad quem regem omnes Angli et Saxones,
qui prius ubique dispersi fuerant, aut cum Paganis sub captivitate erant,
voluntarie converterunt, et suo dominio se subdiderunt.
1 Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series 1866, p. 41. The passage
immediately precedes that already printed, Appendix A. § 9.
2 Angtica, Hibernica, Normannica, Cambrica, a Vctcribus Scripta : Ex quibus
Asser Menevensis, Anonymus de Vita Gulielmi Conquestoris, Thomas Walsingham,
Thomas De la More, Gulielmus Gemiticensis, Giraldus Cambrensis, plerique nunc
primum in luccm editi Guilielmi Camdeni, ex bibliotheca Francfort 1603, p. 15.
An edition of Asser is printed in the Momuncnta Historica Brit, with the inter-
polated passage within brackets p. 489. The text there adopted is that by Wise
in his ' Annales rerum gestarum /Elfredi Magni Auctore Asserio Menevensi :
Recensuit Franciscus Wise, Oxonii 1722.' He prints the interpolated passages,
but with the following note : 'Clausulam hanc de discordia Oxoniae omittunt MS.
Cott : et Ed. P[arkeriana] ; c codice autem MS. S&viliano edidit Camdenus.'
APPENDIX A. 313
[Eodem anno exorta est pessima ac teterrima Oxoniae discordia, inter
Grymboldum, doctissimosque illos viros, quos secum illuc adduxit, et
veteres illos scholasticos quos ibidem invenisset ; qui ejus adventu leges,
modos, ac prelegendi formulas ab eodem Grymboldo institutas, omni
ex parte amplecti recusabant : per tres annos haud magna fuerat inter
eos dissensio, occultum tamen fuit odium, quod summa cum atrocitate
postea erupit, ipsa erat luce clarius : quod ut sedaret, rex ille invictissimus
iElfredus de dissidio eo nuntio et querimonia Grymboldi certior factus,
Oxoniam se contulit, ut finem modumque huic controversiae imponeret,
qui et ipse summos labores hausit, causas et querelas utrinque illatas
audiendo. Caput autem hujus contentionis in hoc erat positum : veteres
illi scholastici contendebant, antequam Grymboldus Oxoniam devenisset,
literas illic passim floruisse, etiamsi scholares tunc temporis numero erant
pauciores, quam priscis temporibus, plerisque nimirum saevitia ac tyrannide
Paganorum expulsis ; quin etiam probabant et ostendebant, idque indubi-
tato veterum annalium testimonio, illius loci ordines ac instituta a
nonnullis piis et eruditis hominibus fuisse sancita, ut a D. Gilda, Melkino,
Nennio1, Kentigerno, et aliis qui omnes Uteris illic consenuerunt, omnia
ibidem felici pace et concordia administrates : ac D. quoque Ger-
manum Oxoniam advenisse, annique dimidium illic esse moratum. Quo
tempore per Britanniam iter fecit adversus Pelagianorum haereses con-
cionaturus, ordines et instituta supra mirum in modum comprobavit. Rex
ille inaudita humilitate utramque partem accuratissime exaudivit ; Eos
piis ac salutaribus monitis etiam atque etiam hortans, ut mutuam inter se
conjunctionem et concordiam tuerentur. Itaque hoc animo discessit rex,
quosque ex utraque parte consilio suo esse obtemperaturos et instituta sua
amplexuros. At Grymboldus haec iniquo animo ferens, statim ad monas-
terium Wintoniense ab iElfredo recens fundatum proficiscebatur, deinde
tumbam Wintoniam transferri curavit, in qua proposuerat post hujus
vitae curriculum ossa sua reponenda, in testudine, quae erat facta subter
cancellum ecclesiae D. Petri in Oxonia. Quam quidem ecclesiam idem
Grymboldus extruxerat ab ipso fundamento de saxo summa cura per-
polito.]
Anno Dominicae Incarnationis DCCCLXXXVII. nativitatis autem
iElfredi regis trigesimo sexto2, supra memoratus Paganorum exercitus
Parisiam civitatem derelinquens incolumem, &c.
§ 18. Ex Ranulphi Higden Poly chronic on: Lib. VI. cap. i3.
(See p. 47.)
Psalmos et orationes in unum libellum compegit quern manuale appellans,
i. e. hand boc secum jugiter tulit ; grammaticam minus perfecte attigit, eo
1 Misprinted Nemrio.
2 In Wise's edition trigesimo nono, but in Alon. Hist. Brit, correctly sexto.
3 Printed from the edition of Ranulphi Higden Polychronicon in the Rolls Series
1883, vol. vi. p. 354. The passage in Asser on which Higden has based his
account is as follows : ' Post haec cursum diurnum, id est celebrationes horarum,
ac deinde psalmos quosdam, et orationes multas, quos in uno libro congregatos in
jI4 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
quod tunc temporis in toto regno suo nullus grammaticae doctor extiterit.
Quamobrem ad consilium Neoti Abbatis ' quem crebro visitaverat, scholas
publicas variarum artium apud Oxoniam primus instituit ; quam urbcin in
multis articulis privilegiari procuravit. Neminem illitcratum ad quam-
cunquc dignitatem ecclesiasticam ascendere permittens, optimas leges in
linguam Angliam convertit.
§ 19. Ex Johannis Bromton Chron.(mzChron.Jornattensi)\ fol. 36b2.
(See p. 47.)
Psalmos et orationes in unum libcllum compcgit, quem secum jugiter
circumduxit, grammaticam tamen minus perfecte attigit, eo quod tunc
temporis in toto occidentali regno nullus grammatice doctor extitit,
quamobrem ad consilium beati Neoti abbatis, quem crebro visitaverat,
scolas puplicas variarum artium apud Oxoniam primus instituit, quas in
multis privilegiari procuravit ; unde et ipse rex eleemosine dator missarum
auditor, ignotarum rerum investigator sanctum Grimboldum monachum
literatura et cantu peritum de partibus Gallie, et Johannem monachum
de monasterio sancti David Meneviae in ultimis finibus Walliae posito, ad
se vocavit, ut literaturam ab eis addisceret. Optimates quoque suos ad
literaturam addiscendam in tantum provocavit, ut ipsi Alios suos, vel saltern
si filios non haberent, servos suos Uteris commendarent.
§ 20. Ex Thomae Rudborne Historia Major e Wintoniensi ; Cap. VI3.
(Seep. 49.)
Habuit etiam Alfredus Ethelwardum, virum literatissimum, et Philo-
sophum in Universitate Oxenfordensi, qui sepultus est in Novo Monasterio
sinu suo die noctuque (sicut ipsi vidimus) secum inseparabiliter orationis gratia
inter omnia praesentes vitae curricula ubique circumducebat. Sed, proh dolor !
quod maxime desiderabat, liberalem scilicet artem, desiderio suo non suppetebat,
eo quod, ut loquebatur, illo tempore lectores boni in toto regno Occidentalium
Saxonum non erant. Quod maximum inter omnia praesentis vitae suae impedi-
menta et dispendia crebris querelis, et intimis cordis sui suspiriis fieri affirmabat :
id est, eo, quod illo tempore, quando aetatcm et liccntiam, atque suppetentiam
discendi habebat, magistros non habuerat.' {A/on. Hist. Brit. p. 474.)
1 In the margin of the MS. is written * Nota sub quo Universitas Oxoniensis
incipit.' There is added in another hand (supposed to be Abp. Parker's), « Sed
quantum hie scriptor erraverat vide Io. Caium de Antiquitate Cantabrigiae.'
a Printed by Twisden, Hist. Angliae Decern Scriptorcs, col. 814, from Cottonian
MS. Tiberius, cxiii. It is perhaps also well to give the passage from Asser on which
Brompton has based his account : ' Legatos ultra mare ad Galliam magistros
acquirer* direxit, indeque advocavit Grimbaldum sacerdotem et monachum, venera-
bilem videlicet virum, cantatorem optimum, et omni modo ecclesiasticis disciplinis,
et in divina scripture eruditissimum, et omnibus bonis moribus ornatum ; Johannem
quoque aeque presbytemm et monachum, acerrimi ingenii virum, et in omnibus
disciplinis literatoriae artis eruditissimum, et in multis aliis artibus artificiosum ;
quorum doctiina regis ingenium multum dilatatum est, et eos magna potestate
ditavit et honoravit.' {Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 487.)
3 Printed in Wharton's Anglia Sacra, London 1691, vol. i. p. 207 and p. 208.
APPENDIX A. 315
Wyntoniae, quod modo Hyda nominatur Nobilis iste Alfredus
Regna, quae olim erant in Anglia, in Comitatus dividebat ; et ut fides
Christiana in Regno suo semper cresceret, florens in virtutum floribus,
Universitatem Oxoniensem fundavit
Hie Alfredus quendam subulcum, nomine Denewlphum, inveniens, ad
scolas misit ; qui postmodum Doctor in Theologia Oxoniis factus, per
ipsum Alfredum Regem in Episcopum Wyntoniensem ordinatus est.
§21. Ex Johannis Rossi Historia : fol. 43 b1.
(See p. 50.)
Iste rex [Alfredus] litteratos intime dilexit, quibus virtuosam vitam novit
non deesse. Unde Plegmundum Cantuariensem, et Werferthum Wy-
gorniensem ante praesulatum, ac Athelstanum Herfordensem, et Werulfum
Legecestrensem viros literatos ad se vocavit de regno Merciorum. Hii
ipsum ut optabant erudierunt. Sanctum eciam Grimbaldum Flandrensem
monachum de monasterio Sancti Bertini cum consociis Johanne et Assero, et
Johannem Wallensem a monasterio Sancti David sibi univit. Quorum
doctrina edoctus librorum omnium notitiam habebat. Illo tempore non erant
grammatici in toto regno occidentalium Saxonum. Hie inter laudabilia
magnificentiae suae opera anno Domini DCCCLXXIII, Sancto Neote
instigante, scolas publicas variarum artium apud Oxoniam instituit. Quam
urbem ob scolarium precipuum favorem in multis privilegiavit articulis,
neminem illiteratum ad quamcumque dignitatem ascendere permittens.
Magistri et scolares, qui ad fidem conversi sunt, docuerunt in monasteriis
et locis devotis secundum formam studiorum antiquorum Grekladie,
Lechladie, Staunfordie, Caerleon, Cantebrigie, et Belli siti, et aliorum
quot prius in insula fuerunt hujusmodi studia In prima dicte
Universitatis fundatione ipse nobilis rex Auludedus infra urbis Oxoniae
moenia doctores in Grammatica, artibus, et Theologia tribus locis in
nomine Sancte Trinitatis de suis sumptubus instituit. In quarum una
in alto vico versus portam orientalem situata ; xxvi grammaticos omnibus
necessariis ipsam aulam dotavit, et earn propter scientie inferioritatem
parvam aulam Universitatis appellari decrevit, et sic in diebus meis appel-
lata est. Aliam aulam versus muros urbis boriales, ubi jam dicitur vicus
scolarum, in sumptibus necessariis pro dialecticis seu philosophis xxvi
habundanter construxit. Et hanc minorem aulam Universitatis appellari
precepit. Terciam in alto vico versus portam orientalem fundatam
prime aule occidentali contiguam aulam pro xxvi. theologis appellans,
sacre scripture studium daturis ordinavit, quibus et expensas sumcientes
habundanter exhibuit. Multae alie preter hec in brevi aule alie
singularum facultatum a burgensibus urbis et comprovincialium circum-
jacentium, deinde a remotioribus provinciis sunt exorte, licet non de
regiis expensis, sed regio gracioso exemplo feliciter creverunt.
1 Hearne's edition, 1745, p. 76.
316 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
§22. Petitions to Parliament. No. 6329. In the Second Parlia-
ment, held al Westminster the 15th day of Pasch [ = 25111 of
April], in the second year of King Richard the Second, after the
Conquest of England [ = 1379] l.
(See p. 54.)
A lour trcs excellent et tres redoute ct tres souereyn Seigneur notre
Seigneur le Roy et a son tres sage conseil monstrent ses povres oratours
les mestre et cscolers de son College appclez mokel universite halle en
Oxenford, quele College estoit primierement funduz par votre noble pro-
genitour le Roy Ali'rid, qi dieux assoill, pur la sustenance de vyngt et sys
dyvins perpetuels; que come un Esmon Franceys Citeyn de Londres
pinny son grant avoir ad [avait] pursuiz en tant vers les tenantz des dits
mestre et escolers pur certeyn terres et tenementz dont le dit College
estoit endouez, que meismes les tenantz par collusion et feynt pleder ont
perdus par defaute envers meisme l'esmon les terres et tenemens avant ditz.
Et estre ce, lavant dit Esmon considerant que les dits mestre e escolers ne
purront a cause de leur grant poverte mayntenir encontre lui aucune pro-
cesse ou querele, soi enforce de jour en autre a destroier et disheriter
lavant dit College del remanant de l'endovvement dycell, en tant qil ad
porte sur meismes les mestre et escolers un brief appelez nisi prius pur le
remanant de leur sustenance avant dite, les queux mestre et escolers sont
de non poair de faire defens en meismes le brief tout soit il qils ont suffi-
seauntes evidences a ce faire : et ce purtant que le dit Esmon est de si grant
poair que par douns, mangeries, et autre sotifs voies, il ad procurez tous les
empanellez en l'enqueste a prendre sur ycelle d'estre en tout de sa partie.
Que plese a votre tres sovereyn et gratieus Seigneur le Roy, depuis que
vous estez notre vraie foundoure et avowe, de faire comparoir devant
votre tres sage conseil les parties avant dites pur monstrer leur evidences
sur le droit de la matire sus dite, issint que a cause del povertee de vos
ditz Oratours votre dit College ne soit disheritez en maniere surdit ; eant
regard tres gracieus Seigneur que les nobles Seintz Joan de Beverle, Bede,
Richard Armecan et autres pluseurs famouses doctours et clercs estoient
jadys escolars en meisme votre College, et comenserent es dyvins en
ycelle ; Et ce pur dieux, et en oevre del charitc.
§ 23. Plea of Richard Wilton, Master of University College, in the
suit against the Abbot of Oseney, 1427 2.
(See p. 57.)
.... Praedictus Richardus in propria sua persona protestando dicit,
quod ubi praedictus Abbas breue suum praedictum tulit ipsum. Richardum
1 The original Petition is preserved in the Record Office under Parliamentary
Petitions. It consists of a long narrow strip of parchment (about fourteen inches
in length and five in breadth), the whole petition written in a very small but clear
hand, occupying only eight and a half lines.
2 Printed from Bryan Twyne's Antiquitatis Oxoniensis Academiae Apologia,
1608, p. 189, who has copied it apparently from the original preserved amongst
APPENDIX A. 317
per idem breue per nomen Custodis Magnae Aulae Universitatis Oxon
nominando, dicit quod ipse est Magister eiusdem Aulae & per nomen
Magistri Aulae praedictae cognitus, ac non per nome Custodis Magnae
Aulae praedictae : & quod ipse & omnes praedicti sui Magistri eiusdem
Aulae per nomen Magistrorum eiusdem Aulae cogniti, ac per nomen
Magistrorum Magnae Aulae praedictae implacitati extiterint ; quia dicit
quod magna Aula praedicta est quoddam antiquum Collegium ex funda-
tione & patronatu praedicti Domini Regis nunc & progenitorum suorum
quondam Regum Angliae, videlicet ex fundatione quondam Domini Alfredi,
quondam Regis progenitoris domini Regis nunc praedicti ante tempus a
toto tempore, cuius contrarii memoriahominum non existit : & ad Magis-
trum & septuaginta scholares, videlicet ad viginti sex scholares Philosophos:
& viginti sex scholares Theologos ibidem erudiendos & edocendos & ad
fidem Domini nostri Jesu Christi Sanctae quoque Ecclesiae, ac jura, leges
& consuetudines regni supportandum, manutenendum & sustentandum, ac
per nomen Magistri & scholarium magnae Aulae praedictae habiles facti &
incorporati ad quaecunque, terras seu tenementa sibi perquisita & in posterum
per quirenda, &c.
Passages quoted in Chapter IV. — Oxford during the
Saxon Settlement.
§ 24. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 571 1.
(See p. 81.)
Her CuJ>wulf2 feaht wij> Bretwalas 3 aet Bedcanforda 4- 3 nil. tunas
genom ■ Lygeanbirg 5 • "J JEgelesbirg 6 • Bsenesingtun 7 • J Egonesham • "j
J>y ilcan geare he forJ)ferde.
§ 25. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 661 8.
(See p. 84.)
Her Cenwalh9 gefeaht in Eastron on Posentesbyrg 10 • J gehergeade
Wulfhere Pending o)> u JEscesdune.
the archives in University College. William Smith, in his Annals of University
College, gives an English version. The latter evidently refers to the original, and
it is presumed he would have given it in his appendix of original documents which
he announced, but, as he explains in a postscript, he issued his book in a hurry.
1 Printed from Chronicle A. Wanting in D. and F.
2 CuSulf B, C. CuSa E. 5 Liggeanburh B, C. Lygeanbyrig E.
3 Bryttas B, C. Brytwalas E. 6 ^Eglesburh B, C. ^Eglesbyrig E.
4 Biedcanforda B, C, E. 7 Bensingtun B, C. Benesingtun E.
8 Printed from Chronicle A. Wanting in D. and F.
9 Kenwealh B. Cenwealth C, E.
10 Posentesbyrig B, C, E. n on B. and C : of E.
318 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Passages quoted in Chapter V. — The Foundation of
S. Frideswide's Nunnery.
§26. Ex Baedae Historia Eccksiastica: Lib. III. cap. 8 l.
(See p. 87.)
Nam eo tempore necdum multis in regione Anglorum monasteriis con-
structs, multi de Brittania monachicae conversationis gratia Francorum
vel Galliarum monasteria adire solebant ; sed et filias suas eisdem erudien-
das, ac sponso caelesti copulandas mittebant.
§ 27. Ex Chron. Monaster ii de Abingdon"1.
(See p. 89.)
Quis autem antiquorum illius primum institutor fuerit, monimento
veterum accepimus, quod Cissa rex Occidentalium Saxonum Heano
cuidam, religiosae vitae viro, ac abbati simulque sorori ejusdem, Gille
nomine, locum ad Omnipotentis Dei cultum construendi coenobii dedit,
collatis ad hoc, regio munere, plurimis beneficiis et possessionibus ob vitae
necessarium inibi fore degentium. Uterque siquidem regio nobilitabatur
genere. Verum non multo post, antqeuam designato insisteretur operi,
rex ipse vita functus est.
§ 28. Ex Chron. Monaster ii de Abingdon*.
(See p. 90.)
Verumtamen rex Cedwalla (cujus animae propitietur Deus,) non tantum
bona supra enumerata Abbendoniae contulit, verum etiam de propria
voluntate sua Gille, sorori Heani patricii, dedit licentiam construendi mo-
nasterium in loco qui nunc dicitur Helnestoue juxta Thamisiam ; ubi virgo
Deo sacrata et sacro velamine velata quamplurimas coadunavit sancti-
moniales, quarum in posterum mater extitit et abbatissa. Post hujus de-
cessum, succedente temporis intervallo quam plurimo, translatae sunt
sanctimoniales praefatae ab illo loco ad villam quae dicitur Witham.
Succedentibus vero nonnullis annis, cum grave bellum et a seculo inauditum
ortum fuisset inter Offam regem Merciorum et Kinewifum regem West-
saxonum, tunc temporis factum erat castellum super montem de Witham,
ob cujus rei causam recesserunt sanctimoniales illae a loco illo, nee ulterius
redire perhibentur.
1 Printed in the Monummta Hist. Brit., p. 180.
2 Printed as a note to Chron. Men. Ab. in the Rolls Series 1858, vol. i. p. 1,
from Cottonian MS. Claud, ix. folio 102.
3 Printed from Chron. A/on. Ab., Rolls Series 1858, vol. i. p. 8. From Cotton.
MS. B. vi. The MS. Claud. C. ix. narrates the benefactions of Ceadwalla some-
what differently.
APPENDIX A. 319
§ 29. Ex Cartulario S. Frideswidae penes Dec. et Canon. Eccl.
Christi Oxon 1.
(See p. 91, also p. 142.)
Incipit Registrum cartarum et muniment or um monasterii See. Fridesnvide
Oxon' de fundatione ejusdem loci combustione ac ipsius reno'vatione. Et de omni-
bus ecclesiis maneriis terris tenementis juribus libertatibus privilegiis consue-
tudinibus rusticorum servitutibus Redditus porcionibus pensionibus et possessio-
nibus quibuscunque hucusque ad dictum monasterium pertinentibus secundum
ordinem infer ius dis tine turn.
Notandum quod Didanus, quondam rex Oxenford' regnavit anno
incarnationis Dominicae septingentesimo circiter vicesimo septimo2. Iste
rex Didanus, pater fuit sancte Frideswyde3, qui sibi hunc locum dedit
optatum, et monacharum4 habitum dari fecit, ecclesiam, diversoriaque
1 Printed from folio 7 of the MS. and folio 1 of the Cartulary proper (A).
The Charter itself beginning Anno Dominicae is also repeated on folio 25 of the
same MS. in a copy of a confirmation charter of Edward I. (Ed. I.) ; again on folio
36 in one of Edward III. (Ed. III.) ; and once more on folio 45 in one of Richard
II. (Re), and to all of these the signatures are found added.
The charter only, without the historical introduction, rubric, boundaries, or
signatures, is given in the Chartulary preserved in Corpus Christi College, Oxford,
folio 271, Charter No. 415 (C).
The charter only is also found in an ' inspeximus ' enrolled in the Patent Rolls
5 Hen. V. memb. 3 (Hn.). The variations from Ric. II. are but slight.
The historical introduction and the rubric, as well as the charter, but without
the boundaries or the signatures, is found on folio 5 of the Oseney Chartulary,
preserved amongst the Cottonian MSS. and marked Vitellius E. xv. It is so much
damaged by fire that only a very few various readings can be obtained from it (Os.)
Dugdale, however, copied from the MS. when it was perfect, and printed it in
his edition of 161 2, vol. i. p. 174. From this edition therefore the various readings
are given, whether they can be verified or no (D). In the new editions of Dugdale
of 181 7 and 1846 the boundaries and signatures are added, professing to be taken
from a MS. described as follows (vol. ii. p. 144) : ' Ex MS. Codice penes Girardum
Langbane S. Theol. D. Praepositum Colleg. Reginae Oxon an. 1652.' But whence
Dr. Langbane's copy was derived does not appear ; most of the various readings
seem to be simply the writer's emendations or errors, but some few are given as
they are printed in the second and third editions of Dugdale's Monasticon (Dd.).
It will be seen from the variations, which are given very fully, that it is difficult
to determine the reading of the Archetype. The Inspeximus of Ed. III. and Ric. II.
seem to be copied from the same original but neither from A. Possibly Ed. I.
may be also from the same original. It would seem however by the indiscriminate
use of y for p and ]> that the original was badly copied from the original charter
with the names written in Anglo-Saxon letters. For this reason the y has been
kept in the present transcript, in those cases where it is written, instead of writing
the w or th for which it was intended. A, perhaps, was also taken from the
original MS. by a copyist who understood the letters, but as the manuscript
only contains a portion of the signatures it is difficult to judge. A very large
proportion of the variations are obviously due to the mere emendations of the
copyists, or to their errors. Still it has been thought best to give the whole rather
than make a selection.
2 DCC Circiter xxvi. D. 3 Fredeswidae D. 4 Monachorum D.
320 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
religioni aptissima sccus cam construxit, que quidem liquet in vita ejusdem
virginis1. Item ibidem patet *-', quod locum ilium qui dicebatur 8 Thorn-
burie*, nunc autem Benseia5, eadem virgo pacifice optinuit. Nam ibidem
latitando fontem precibus impctravit, et unum a demone 8 vcxatum, et
alteram cujus manus securi adheserat liberavit. Post gloriosum bcate
Frid'7 obitum, per intcrvalla temporum, amotis sanctimonialibus8, intro-
ducti sunt canonici secularcs.
Postea, anno gratiae millesimo quarto, Ethel redus 9 Rex omnes Danos Angliam
incolcntes utriusque sexus jussit occidere, Et combusti sunt apud Oxon' omnes
qui illic l0 cotifugerant, cum ecclesia, libris, et ornament is, quod patet per cartam
Etbelredi Regis in modum qui subscribiturn.
ANNO Dominice incarnationis millesimo quarto12 indictione sccunda1"',
anno vero Imperii mei vicesimo quinto14, Dei disponente providentia,
Ego Ethelred15, totius Albionis monarchiam gubernans, monasterium quod-
dam in urbe situm que Oxenford10 appcllatur, ubi bcate zoma 17 Frid'.18,
requiescitlibertate privilegii auctoritate videlicet19 regali 20 pro cunctipatran-
tis amore stabilivi, et territoria que sibi21 adjacent Ghristi arcisterio22 novi
restauratione libelli recuperavi, cunctisque hanc paginulam23 intuentibus,
qua ratione id actum sit, paucis verborum signis retexam. Omnibus enim
in hac patria degentibus satis24 constat fore notissimum, quoniam dum25
a me decretum cum consilio optimatum satrapumque meorum exivit, ut
cuncti Dani qui in hac insula velut lollium 2C inter triticum pululando 27 emer-
serant, justissima exanimatione28 necarentur, hocque decretum inortetenus
ad effectum perduccretur ; ipsi quique29 in praefata urbe morabantur
Dani mortem evadere nitentes, hoc Christi sacrarium fractis per vim val-
vis ac pessulis intrantes, asilum no sibi propagnaculumque 31 contra urbanos
I ut patet in vita beatae virginis D. 2 patet ibidem D.
3 tunc dicebatur D. Os. 4 Thornebirie D. Os. 5 Benseya D.
b demonio D. Os.
7 Fredeswide D. Frideswide Os.
8 amotis monialibus D. Os. 9 Etheldredus D. ,0 illuc D.
II in hunc modum quae subsequitur D. in modum q {the rest destroyed) Os.
12 millesimo iiijto Os, Ed. Ill, Re.
13 indictione ii-la Ed. Ill, Re. Hn. u mei xxvto Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re. Hn.
15 Adelred C. D, Etheldredus Os. Ed. III. Re. Adeldred Ed. I.
18 Oxeneford C. Oxoneford D, Oxenforde Os. Oxonaford, Ed. Ill, Re. Oxna-
ford Hn.
17 zoma requiescit Frideswide C. zoma requiescit Frid' Ed. I. soma requiescit
Frideswyde Ed, III, Re. Ibid. Frideswide I In.
ls ubi beata requiescit Frideswide D. 19 videlicet omitted D.
-' regali omit ted I In.
21 ipsi C. D, Ed. III. Re. " archisterio D. Asciterio Os.
23 paginam D. 2l sat constat C. D. Os, stat constat Ed. Ill, Re. Hn.
* dum omitted Ed. III. ■ lolium C. D. Hn. " pulhdando D.
23 exinanitione 1). (The word is scarcely legible in A.) But all other MSS. follow
the reading given in the text.
•9 ipsi qui C. Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re. 30 asylum C.
31 repugnaculumque C. Os., Ed. I. Ed. III. Re.
APPENDIX A. 321
suburbanosque inibi fieri decreverunt : sed cum populus omnes * insequens
eos2, necessitate compulsus, ejicere niteretur nee valeret, igne tabulis in-
jecto, hanc ecclesiam, ut liquet, cum ornamentis3 ac libris combusserunt.
Postquam Dei adjutorio a me et a meis constat renovata et ut prefatus
sum, retentis privilegii dignitate cum adjacentibus sibi territoriis in Christi
onomate 4 roborata, et omni libertate donata tarn in regalibus exactionibus
quam in ecclesiasticis 5 omnino consuetudinibus. Si autem fortuitu0 aliquo
contigerit 7 tempore aliquem vesane 8 mentis, quod absit, irretitum 9 desidia,
hujusce donationis nostre munus, defraudare satagente 10, anathema11 sancte
Dei ecclesie excipiat eternum mortis, nisi ante exitum questionem tarn
calumpniferam ad satisfactionem perducat exoptabilem 12. Istis terminis
praefati monasterii rura circumscripta 13 clarescunt 14.
Scripta fuit hec cedula 15 jussu prefate Regis in villa regia que Hedyndon 16
appellatur die octavarum beati Andree Apostoli, hiis consentientibus
principibus qui subtus 17 notati 18 videntur.
Ego19 Ethelred20 Rex Anglorum hoc21 privilegium pro Christi nomine
perpetua libertate predicto 22 donavi.
Ego Alfrich23 Dorovernensis ecclesie archipresul corroboravi 24 sub anathe-
mate.
Ego Wulstan25 Eborace26 civitatis Archipontifex confirmavi.
Ego Ethelrich27 Scireburn' ecclesie episcopus consensi.
Ego Elfgifu 2a thoro consecrata regio hanc donationem sublimavi.
Ego Alfwod Cridiensis ecclesie episcopus vegetavi.
1 omnis C, Ed. Ill, Re.
2 eos transposed after compulsus C, D, Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Hn.
3 munimentis Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re, Hn. 4 honore roborata D.
5 Aecclesiasticis Hn. 6 fortuito D, Os.
7 contigeret D. 8 vesano Ed. Ill, Re. 9 inretitum Re.
10 satagente diabolo defraudare D. u in anathema Hn.
12 The page of the Oseney MS. ends here, and no other pages appear in the
volume giving a continuation.
13 circumcincta C, D, Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re.
14 After clarescunt Dugdale (ed. 1682) adds the words ' Caetera desunt in
Registro.' In C. there follows another charter beginning ' Henricus Dei gratia
Rex.' In A, Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re. and Hn., here follow the boundaries of the
property beginning with those of Winchendon.
15 Scripta est autem hec sedula Ed. I, ibid, scedula Ed. Ill, Re.
16 Hedenandun Ed. HI, Hedenandon Re, Hedenandum Hn.
17 subter Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re. 18 vocati Ed. I.
19 + Ego and so throughout Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re, Hn.
20 Adeldred Ed. I, Aldeldred Ed. Ill, Adelred Re, Aldelred Hn.
21 hoc omitted Hn.
22 predicto omitted Ed. III.
23 Alfric Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re, Alfrik Hn.
24 coroboravi Re 2* Wlstan Ed. I, Yulstan Ed. Ill, Re, Hn.
26 heboracae Ed. Ill, Re. Hn.
a Ego Ethelric and Ego Alfwod are omitted here and occur lower down in Ed.
I, Ed. Ill, Re and Hn.
28 Alfgifu Ed. I, Ed. Ill, Re. Hn.
; • • THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Ego Adelstaa regalium primogcnitus filiorum cum fratribus mcis testis
bencvolus interim, &c. ut in codicillo prcdicto1.
Ego Alfean VVcntanus antistes consignavi.
Ego Alfstan Fontonicnsis 2 episcopus ccclcsic consolidavi.
Ego Alfvvn 3 London' ccclcsie episcopus consecravi.
Ego Godvv 4 Licetfeldensis "' ecclesie episcopus communivi.
Ego Orbyrt0 australium Saxonum episcopus conclusi.
Ego Edelric7 Scireburncnsis ecclesie episcopus consenci.
Ego Alfield 8 Cridiensis ccclcsic episcopus vegetavi.
Alfric dux !).
Ego LeofJ>ine 10 dux.
Ego Yulgar abbas.
Ego Alfisige n abbas.
Ego Kenuk M abbas.
Ego Alfsige abbas.
Ego Athcmer 13 comes.
Ego Ordulf comes14.
Ego Ayelmer comes10.
Ego Ayelric comes10.
Ego Elfgar comes 17.
Ego Goda comes 1S.
Ego Eyelyerd comes19.
Ego Ayelwyn comes2'1.
Ego Orirdmer21.
Et Ego Leofyine comes22.
Ego Godyin comes 23.
Ego Lufyine comes 24.
1 A ends at this point, and is followed by ' Predictus vero Rex.' See A § 61.
The text given above is taken from Ed. I. &c. ut in codicillo predicto omitted Ed. I,
Ed. Ill, Re. Hn.
-' Fontanensis Ed. Ill, Re. 3 Alfuin Re.
4 Godyine Ed. Ill, Re. 5 lichfeldensis Ed. III. Ordbyrt. Hn.
7 Edelbrit Dd. 8 Alfeold Ed. Ill, Alfyold Re, Alfiod Hn. Elfeod Dd.
» Ego Alfric Ed. Ill, Re., Dd., Hn. 10 Leofyine Ed. Ill, Re. Hn.
» Alfsige Ed. Ill, Re, Alsigge Dd. 12 Kenulf Ed. III. Re Hn.
13 seyelmer comes Ed. Ill, Ayelmer minister] Re ^ 14 Ordulf in. Re
15 ayelmer comes Ed. III. Ibid. m. Re, Ayelmer m Hn.
10 ceyelric comes Ed. Ill, ayelric m. Re, Aelryc comes Dd.
17 Elfgar m. Re, Hn., Elfgar comes Dd. 18 Goda m. Ed. Ill, Re
19 Ayelycrd m. Re, Hn., Athelwerd comes Dd.
2" ccyeline comes Ed. Ill, ayelne m Re, Hn., Athlwyne comes Dd.
21 Ordmcr comes Ed. III. Ordmer m. Re Ordemer, m. Hn. Ordmere, comes Dd.
22 Ibid. m. Re, Hn. Et omitted throughout except in A.
23 Godyine comes Ed. III. Ibid. m. Re, Hn.
24 Ibid. in. Ric. II. In all three cases in S. Frideswide's Cartulary and in the
Inspeximus in the Patent Roll the last signature is followed immediately by the
commencement of another inspeximus.
APPENDIX A. 323
§ 30. Ex Willelmi Malmesbiriensis de Gestis Pontificutn,
Libro IV, § 178 \
(See p. 94.)
Fuit antiquitus in Oxenefordensi civitate monasterium sanetimonialium,
m quo requiescit Frisewida2 virgo sacratissima. Regis filia regis thoros
despexit, integritatem suam Domino Christo professa. Sed ille cum ad
virginis nuptias appulisset animum, precibus et blanditiis inaniter con-
sumptis, vi agere intendit. Quo Frideswida cognito fugae in silvam
consuluit. Nee latibulum latere potuit amantem, nee cordis desidia obfuit
quin persequeretur fugitantem. Iterato ergo virgo, juvenis furore com-
perto, per occultos tramites, Deo comitante, Oxenefordam ingressa est
nocte intempesta. Illuc, cum mane curiosus amator advolasset, puella jam
de fuga desperans, simulque pro lassitudine nusquam progredi potens, Dei
tutelam sibi, persecutori penam imprecata est. Jamque ille cum comitibus
portas subibat urbis, cum, caelesti plaga irruente, cecitatem incurrit.
Intellectoque pertinatiae suae delicto, et Fridesuuida per nuntios exorata,
eadem celeritate qua perdiderat lumen recepit. Hinc timor regibus inolevit
Angliae illius urbis ingressum et hospitium cavere, quod feratur pestifer esse,
singulis refugientibus sui dampno periculi veritatem rei experiri. Ibi ergo
femina, virginei triumfi compos, statuit monasterium, et diebus suis, sponso
vocante, subivit fatum. Tempore vero regis Egelredi, cum Dani, neci adjudi-
cati, in monasterium illud confugissent, pariter cum domibus, insatiabili ira
Anglorum, flammis absumpti sunt. Sed mox regis penitentia purgatum
sacrarium, restitutum monasterium, veteres terrae redditae, recentes posses-
siones additae. Nostro tempore, paucissimis ibi clericis, &c.
§ 31. Ex Sanctae Frideswidae Vita : MS. Bodleian, fol. 1403.
(See p. 101.)
Sepulta est beata virgo in basilica intemerate semper virginis Dei
genetricis S. Mariae in parte australi prope ripam fluminis Thamesis. Sic
enim se tunc habebat situs basilica usque ad tempus Regis Althelredi qui,
combussis in ea Dacis qui confugerant illuc, basilice ambitum, sicut ante
noverat, ampliavit. Hinc nimirum actum est, sepulchrum, quod ante
fuerat in parte, medium ex tunc esse contiget.
§ 32. Ex Annalibus Monaster ii de Winionia*.
(See p. 102.)
Anno DCCXXT. Ethelardus Rex Westsaxonum. Hujus conjux
Printed in the Rolls Series, London 18,70, p. 315. The chief MS. used is
one supposed to be an autograph of William of Malmesbury, ; preserved in
Magdalen College, Oxford (No. 172).
2 Sic in the MS., but iri most copies Frideswida or Fritheswida.
3 The MS. is of the twelfth century and is marked Laud. Miscell. 114.
4 The full title is 'Annales Monasterii de Wintonia, ab anno 519 ad annum
1277, authore Monacho Wintoniensis.' It is preserved amongst the Cottonian
MSS., Domitian A, xiii. i. It is printed imperfectly in Wharton's Anglia Sacra, vol. i.
p. 289, but accurately in Annates Monastici, Rolls Series 1865, vol. ii. pp. 3-I25-
V 2
524 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Fritheswitha Regina dcdit Wintoniensi Ecclesiac Tantonam de suo patir-
monio. Et ipse Ethclardus dc sua parte addidit ad praedictum Manerium
ad opus ejusdem Ecclesiae vii. mansas.
Passages quoted in Chapter VI. — Oxford a Border Town.
§ 33. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 777 1.
(See p. 109.)
Her Cynewulf 7 Offa gefuhton ymb Benesingtun 2 • 7 Offa nam bone tun.
§ 34. Ex Chron. Monasterii de Abingdon.
(See p. 109.)
Kinewulfo ab Offa regi Merciorum in bello victo omnia quae juri-
dictioni suae subdita fuerant ab oppido Walingefordiae in australi parte
ab Ichenildestrete usque ad Esseburiam, et in aquilonali parte usque ad
Tamisiam, Rex Offa sibi usurpavit 3.
Passages quoted in Chapter VII. — Oxford during the Danish
Incursions in the Ninth and Tenth Centuries.
§ 35. From the Anglo- Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 912 \
(Seep. 116.)
Her gefor iE^ered0 ealdormon on Mercum6 • 7 Eadvveard7 cyng feng
to Lundenbyrg 8 • 7 to Oxnaforda 9 . 7 to ^aem landum eallum be baerto
hierdon 10-
§ 36. Ex Florentii Wigorniensis Chron., sub anno 912 n.
(Seep. 125.)
DCCCCXII. — Eximiae vir probitatis, dux et patricius, dominus et sub-
regulus Merciorum iEtheredus, post nonnulla quae egerat bona decessit.
I Printed from Chronicle A. Similar in the others but omitted in F.
'2 Bensingtuo B.
3 Printed in Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series 1858, vol. i. p. 14, from Cottonian MS.
Claudian, \\. vi.
4 Printed from Chronicle A. It occurs in substance in the other five Chronicles.
6 Relied D.
c on Myrcum IJ, C, D. Mrycena. ealdor E. This first line omitted in F.
7 Eadward E, F. * Lundenbyrig 15, C, D, E. Lundenberi F.
9 Oxanaforda F. 10 hyrdon 13, C, D, F. gebyredon E.
II Printed in Monumcnta Hist. Brit., p. 569.
APPENDIX A.
3^5
Post cujus mortem uxor illius iEgelfleda, regis Alfredi filia, regnum
Merciorum, exceptis Lundonia et Oxeneforda quas suus germanus rex
Eadwardus sibi retinuit, haud brevi tempore strenuissime tenuit.
§ 37. Ex Simeonis Dunelmensis Historia, sub anno 910*.
(Seep. 125.)
Anno DCCGCX. — Rex Edwardus Londoniam et Oxnaforda et quae ad
earn pertinent suscepit.
§ 38. Ex Henrici Huntendunensis Historia : Lib. V. § 1 5 2.
(Seep. 126.)
Anno sequente, defuncto Edredo duce Merce, rex Edwardus saisivit
Londoniam et Oxinefordiam, omnemque terram Mercensi provinciae
pertinentem.
§ 39. From LEstorie des Engles solum Geffrei G at mar, line 3477 s.
(See p. 126.)
UEstorie des Engles.
En icel tens morust uns reis
Edelret, ki ert sur Merceneis.
Icist Edelret Lundres teneit ;
Li reis Elveret mis i 1'aveit.
Ne 1'aveit mie en heritage ;
Gum dust morir, si fist ke e sage
Al rei Eadward rendi son dreit,
Od quanqu'il i aparteneit.
Lundres rendi ainz k'il fust mort.
E la cite de Oxeneford,
E le pais e les contez
Ki apendeient as citez.
UHistoire des Anglais.
En ce temps mourut un roi,
Ethelred, qui etait sur les Merciens.
Get Ethelred Londres tenait ;
Le Roi Alfred mis l'y avait.
[II] ne 1'avait pas [eu] en heritage.
Quand il dut mourir, il agit sage-
ment :
Au roi Edward il rendi sa legitime,
Avec toutes ses appartenances.
Londres [il] rendit avant qu'il fut
mort,
E la cite d'Oxford,
Et le pays et les comtes
Qui dependaient des cites.
§ 40. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 924*.
(See p. 135.)
Her Eadweard5 cing gef6r on Myrcum set Fearndune 6 • 7 iElfweard 7
his sunu swi)>e hra)>e J>aes gef6r on Oxnaforda8 • 7 heora lie licga^ on
1 Printed in Monumenta Hist. Brit. p. 686.
2 Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series 1879, P- x55-
3 Printed in Monumenta Hist. Brit., p. 807. The modern French version
supplied by M. Francisque Michel.
* Printed from Chronicle B„ Chronicles A, E, and F omit the paragraph
relating to Oxford.
5 Aedward E. Eadward F. 6 Farndune D. 7 vElfwerd C.
8 Oxanforda D.
]Z6 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Wintanceastre. 7 /Ebcstan A waea of Myrcum gecoren to cingc . 7 srt
Cingestunc a gchalgod.
§ 41. Ex Florentii Wigorniensis Chron., sub anno 92^.
(Seep. 135.)
Cujus corpus [i.e. Eadwardi Regis] Wintoniam delatum, in Novo-
monasterio regio more scpclitur. Nee multo post filius ejus Alfwardus
apud Oxenfordam deccssit, et sepultus est ubi et pater illius.
§ 42. Ex Wilklmi Malmesbiriensis de Gcstis Regum, Libro II. § 1264,
(Seep. 13O.)
Primogenitum Etlielstanum habuit ex Egwinna illustri foemina; et
filiam, cujus nomen scriptum non in promptu habeo : hanc ipse frater
Sihtricio Northanhimbrorum rcgi nuptum dedit. Secundus filius Edwardr
fuit Ethelwardus ex Elfleda filia Ethelmi comitis, Uteris apprime institutus,
multumque Elfredum avum vultu et moribus praeferens, sed cita post
genitorem morte subtractus.
Passages quoted in Chapter VIII. — Oxford during the Danish
Invasion in the early part of the Eleventh Century.
§ 43. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1002/'
(See p. 141.)
. ... 7 on bam geare se cyng het ofslean ealle pa Deniscan men be on
Angelcynne waeron. Dis waes gedon G on Britius massedaeig • for&im bam
cyninge wses gecyd • f hi woldan hine besyrwan set his life • 7 si$San ealle
his vvitan • 7 habban sib an }ns rice 7.
Passages quoted in Chapter VIII. — Oxford during the
Danish Invasion.
§ 44. Ex Wilklmi Malmesbiriensis de Geslis Regum, Libro II. § 179'.
(See p. 146.)
Sequenti magnum concilium congregatum est apud Oxencfordum
Danorum et Anglorum ; ubi rex nobilissimos Danorum, Sigeferdum et
1 /EthelstanA,C,D,E. ;EthestanusF. 2 Cyngestune D.
;' Printed in Hist. Man. Brit. 1879, p. 573.
4 Printed from the edition by the English Plistorical Society, ed. T. D. Hardy,
1840, vol. i. p. 197. •' Printed from Chronicle C. Wanting in A, B.
6 The words ' Dis w;\s gedon' are omitted in 1), E, and F.
7 The words ' butan selcre wiScwetfenesse' (without any gainsaying) are inter-
lineated in Chronicle F.
8 Printed from the edition by the English Historical Society, 1840, vol. i. p. 297.
APPENDIX A. 327
Morcardum, interfici jussit, delatione proditoris Edrici perfidiae apud se
insimulatos. Is illos, favorabilibus assentationibus deceptos, in triclinium
pellexit, largiterque potatos satellitibus ad hoc praeparatis anima exuit :
causa caedis ferebatur quod in bona eorum inhiaverat. Clientuli eorum,
dominorum necem vindicare conantes, armis repulsi, et in turrim ecclesiae
sanctae Frideswidae coacti ; unde dum ejici nequirent, incendio con-
flagrati.
§ 45. Ex Henrici Huntendunensis His tor ia: Lib. VI. § 21.
(See p. 147.)
Quo proventu rex Adelred in superbiam elatus et perfidiam prolatus,
omnes Dacos qui cum pace erant in Anglia clandestina proditione fecit
mactari una eademque die, scilicet in festivitate S. Bricii. De quo scelere
in pueritia nostra quosdam vetustissimos loqui audivimus, quod in unam-
quamque urbem rex praefatus occultas miserit epistolas, secundum quas
Angli Dacos omnes eadem die et eadem hora, vel gladiis truncaverunt
impraemeditatos, vel igne simul cremaverunt subito comprehensos.
§ 46. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1006 2,
(See p. 148.)
. . . . 7 ]>£ to ^am middan wintran eodan him to heora gearwan feorme •
ut Jmruh Hamtunscire 3 into Bearrucscire 4 to Readingon 5 • 7 hi a dydon
heora ealdan gewunan . atendon hiora herebeacen swa hi ferdon. Wendon
J>a to Wealingaforda 6 • 7 f eall forswaeldon • 7 waeron him ^a ane niht set
Geolesige 7 . 7 wendon him J>a iandlang JEscesdune to Gwicelmes hlaewe 8 •
7 J)aer onbidedon beotra gylpa • forSon oft man cwarS • gif hi Gwicelmes
hlaew gesohton • f hi naefre to sse gan ne scoldon • wendon him J>a o^res
weges hamwerd.
§ 47. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 109.9
(See p. 150.)
.... 7' 6ft hi on }>£ buruh Lundene 10 fuhton. Ac si Gode lof f heo gyt
gesund stent • 7 hi J>aer aefre f fel geferdon . 7 }>a aefter middan wintra • J>a
namon hi aenne upgang tit Jmruh Cittern • 7 swa t6 Oxenaforda11 • 7 %a
buruh forbaerndon • 7 namon hit ^a on twa healfa Temese to scypeweard.
1 Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series 1879, P- I74-
2 Printed from Chronicle C. Wanting in A. and B.
3 Hamtescire F. 4 Bearruhscire D. Barrucscire E.
5 Raedingan E. 6 Wealingaeforda D.
7 Ceolesege D, omitted E. and F.
8 Cwichelmes hlaewe D. Cwicchelmes hlaewe E.
9 Printed from Chronicle C. Wanting in A, B ; summarized in F.
10 Lundenne D. ll Oxneforda E. Oxanaforda F.
328 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
§ 48. Ex Florentii Wigorniensis Chron., sub anno 1010'.
(Seep. 150.)
Memoratus Danorum cxcrcitus mcnsc Januario navibus cxilicntes, per
saltum qui dicitur Ciltern Oxenefordam adeunt, camque dcvastantcs incen-
dunt, ct sic in utraquc parte Thamensis fluminis in revertcndo praedam
agunt.
§ 49. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 10102.
(See p. 152.)
.... 7 bonne hi t6 scipon ferdon • bonne sceolde fyrd ut eTtongean j> hi
up woldan • bonne ferde seo fyrd ham • 7 bonne hi waeron be easton • bonne
heold man fyrde be westan • 7 bonne hi wacron be su^an • bonne waes ure
fyrd be nor&m. ponne bead man eallan witan to cynge • 7 man sceolde
bonne racdan hu man bfsne eardwerian sceolde. Ac beah mon bonne hwaet
rnjdde • f ne st6d fur^on acnne mona^. TEt nextan naes nan heafodman f
fyrde gaderian wolde • ac aelc fleah swa he maest mihte • ne fur£on nan
scfr nolde obre gelacstan ojt nextan.
§ 50. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 10133.
(See p. 152.)
.... 7 sy^an he com ofer Wactlinga straete • \v6rhton j> macste yfel f
acnig here d6n mihte. Wcnde ba to Oxenaforda 4 7 seo buruhwaru sona
beah 7 gislude • 7 banon to Winceastre 7 hi f ylce dydon.
§ 51. Ex Florentii Wigo?'niensis Chron., sub anno 10135.
(See p. 152.)
Quibus ita facientibus, et rabie ferina debacchantibus, venit Oxcnc-
fordam, et illam citius quam putavit obtinuit obsidibusque acccptis, festinato
Wintoniam properavit.
§ 52. Ex Willelmi Malmesbiricnsis dc Gcstis Rcgum, Libro II. § 177 fi.
(See p. 153.)
Mox ad australes regiones veniens, Oxenefordenses et Wintonienscs
leges suas adorare cocgit.
1 Printed in Monumenta Hist. Brit. p. 586.
2 Printed from Chronicle C. Wanting in A, B, and F.
8 Printed from Chronicle C. Wanting in A and B.
4 Oxnaforda E. Oxanafordan F. Printed in Monumenta Hist. 7>rtt.p. 588.
6 Printed from the edition by the English Historical Society, 1840, vol. i. p. 290.
APPENDIX A. 329
§ 53. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1015 l.
(See p. 154.)
Her 6n bissum geare • waes f mycle gemot on Oxenaforda2 • 7 ¥&r Eadric
ealdorman beswac SiferS3 • 7 Morcore* • ba yldestan begenas into Seofon
burgum • bepaehte hf into his bure • 7 hi man baerinne ofsloh ungerisenlice •
7 se cyng ba genam ealle hiora aehta -7 het niman Siferoes 5 lafe • 7 gebringan
hi binnan Ealdelmesbyrig6.
§ 54. Ex Florentii Wigorniensis Chron., sub anno 1015 7.
(See p. 154.)
Hoc anno, cum apud Oxenefordam magnum haberetur placitum, perfidus
dux Edricus Streona, digniores et potentiores ministros ex Seovenburgen-
sibus, Sigeferthum et Morcarum filios Earngrimi, in cameram suam dolose
suscepit, et occulte eos ibi necari jussit; quorum facultates rex iEthel-
redus accepit, et derelictam Sigeferthi Aldgitham ad Maidulfi urbem deduci
praecepit.
§ 55. Ex Henrici Huntendunensis His tor ia : Lib. VI. § 10 8.
(Seep. 154.)
Anno XV. dux Edricus prodidit Sigeferd et Morchere proceres egregios ;
vocatos namque in cameram suam fecit occidi. Edmundus vero filius regis
Adelredi terram eorum saisivit, et uxorem Sigeferdi duxit
§ 56. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub annis 1016, 10179.
(See p. 158.)
.... 7 hi tohwurfon £a mid bissum sehte • 7 feng Eadmund to
Westsexan10 • 7 Gnut to Myrcan11 • 7 se here gewende ba to scypon • mid
bam ^ingon J>e hi gefangen hsefdon • 7 Lundenwaru12 grrSode wr5 ))one
here • 7 him frrS gebohton • 7 se here gebrohton hyra scipu on Lundene •
7 him winter setl ^aerinne namon • pa to See Andreas maessan forSferde se
kyning Eadmund • 7 his lie lr3 on Glaestingabyrig • mid his ealdan feeder
Eadgare.
[1017]. Her on j>issum geare feng Cnut kyning t6 eallon Angelcynnes
1:;
1 Printed from Chronicle C. Wanting in A and B.
2 Oxnaforda D. Oxonaforda E. Oxanafordan F. 3 Sigeferth Ey F.
4 Morcer D. Morcaer E. Marcer F. 5 Siferthses D. Sigeferthes E.
6 Mealdelmesbyrig E. F. 7 Printed in Monumenta Hist. Brit. p. 589.
8 Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series 1879, p. 181.
9 Printed from Chronicle C. Chronicle B has ceased entirely and A practically.
10 Weastseaxan E. Westseaxan F.
11 to tham norS daele D. to Myrcean E, F.
12 Luftdenewaru E. The whole paragraph ' to Saerinne namon ' omitted F.
13 to eall Englalandes rice D.
330 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
ryce • 7 hit todrclde on feower • him sylfan Westsexan1 • 7 purkylle Easten-
glana 7 Eadrice Myrcan3 • 7 Irce Nor^hymbran 4.
§ 57. Ex Henrici Huntendunensis Historia : Lib. VI. § 14 5.
(See p. 159.)
Edmundus rex post paucos cxhinc dies proditione occisus est apud
Oxineford. Sic autem occisus est. Cum rex hostibus suis terribilis et
timendissimus in regno floreret, ivit noctc quadam in domum evacuationis
ad requisite naturae, ubi filius Edrici ducis in fovea secretaria delitescens
consilio patris, regem inter celanda cultello bis acuto pcrcussit ; et inter
viscera ferrum figens, fugiens reliquit. Edricus igitur ad regem Cnut
veniens, salutavit eum dicens : ' Ave rex solus.' Gui cum rem gestam denu-
dasset, respondit rex : ' Ego te ob tanti obscquii meritum cunctis Anglorum
proceribus reddam celsiorem.' Jussit ergo eum excapitari, et caput in stipite
super celsiorem Londoniae turrim figi. Sic periit Edmundus rex fortis
cum uno anno regnasset; et sepultus est juxta Edgar avum suum in
Glastcngebirh.
§58. Ex Willelmi Malmesbiriensis de Gesiis Regum, Libro II. § 180 6.
(See p. 159.)
Nee multo post, in festo sancti Andreae, ambiguum quo casu extinctus,
Glastoniae juxta Edgarum avum suum sepultus est. Fama Edricum
infamat, quod favore alterius mortem ei per ministros porrexerit. Cubi-
cularios regis fuisse duos, quibus omnem vitam suam commiserat: quos
pollicitationibus illectos, et primo immanitatem flagitii exhorrentes, brevi
complices suos effecisse. Ejus consilio ferreum uncum, ad naturae requi-
sita sedenti in locis posterioribus adegisse.
§ 59. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 10187.
(See p. 161.)
7 Dene 7 Engle wurdon sammaele aet Oxanaforda8 • to Eadgares lage".
Passages quoted in Chapter IX. — Oxford during the Forty Years
BEFORE THE NoRMAN CONQUEST.
§ 60. Ex Chron. Monaster ii de Abingdon™.
(See pp. 164, 165.)
Unde ego Cnut, Ejus gratuita miseratione et inolita benignitate totius
Albionis basileus, parvam ruris particulam, quod ab hujus patriae incolis
1 Westscaxan E. 2 porcylle East Englan E, F. 3 Myrcean D, E, F.
4 Eiric D. Yrice E, F. 5 Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series 1879^.185.
f' Printed from the edition of the English Historical Society, vol. i. p. 303.
7 Printed from Chronicle D. 8 Oxnaforda C, E. Oxanafordan F.
9 ' to Eadgares lage,' omitted in C, E, and F.
10 Printed in Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series 1658, vol. i. p. 439. This charter
of Cnut, printed from MS. Claudian, P. vi, has been collated with Claudian, c. ix .
fol. 127b.
APPENDIX A. 331
Linford nuncupatur, duorum videlicet manentium quantitatem, quod-
damque monasteriolum in honore Sancti Martini praesulis consecratum,
cum adjacenti praediolo in urbe quae famoso nomine Oxnaford nuncupatur,
Domino nostro Jhesu Christo Ejusque genetrici semperque Virgini Mariae,
ad usus monachorum loco qui celebri Abbandun vocitatur onomate, aeterna
largitus sum hereditate ; in nomine sanctae Trinitatis et individuae Unitatis
praecipiens ut nullus alicujus personae hominum praefatam donationem a
praedicto coenobio auferre praesumat. Haec autem ruris particula libera
ut maneat praecipio, causis tribus segregatis, expeditione scilicet hostili,
fundatione arcis regiae, pontisque restauratione. Si quis vero &c
Thisne landsplot becwaeth JEthelwine into Abbendune and thone hagan
on Oxnaforda, the he sylf onsaet, on mycelre gewitnysse1.
[Tantillum terrae hujus Adelwinus testamento hereditavit Abbendonam,
et curiam apud Oxonofordam in qua ipsemet commanebat. Et hoc fecit
multorum testimonio2].
Acta est ergo haec cartula anno Dominicae Incarnationis XXXII. post
mille, indictione XV. ; et ut haec scedula inviolabilis firmitatis soliditatem
obtinere possit.— Ego Gnut &c.3
Atheluuino abbate diem claudente supremum, successit ei Siwardus ex
Glestoniensi coenobio monachus, tarn secularium quam ecclesiasticarum
vigore admodum suffultus. Ob cujus etiam benignitatem, quam rex Gnuto
ex ipsius pectore jugiter novit exuberare, memoratus rex ecclesiam Sancti
Martini in Oxoneforda cum uno praediolo huic domui caritative contulit4.
§61. Ex Carlulario S. Frideswidae penes Dec. et Canon. Eccl. Christi,
Ox on0.
(See p. 166.)
Praedictus vero rex Ethelredus eandem ecclesiam, sicut ante voverat, ampli-
cavit, sicut in cronicis.
Et postea antequam viris Normannorum Deus Angliam subdidisset Aben-
donensi cuidam abbati ecclesia ista cum possessionibus suis a quodam rege
donata fuit. Spoliati igitur bonis suis et sedibus expulsi fuisse canonici
seculares memorantur ; et monachis res addicta per annos aliquot eorum
1 Omitted in Claud., c. ix.
2 Omitted in Claud. B. vi., and occurs only in Claud., c. ix.
3 Here follows the list of signatures. The passage occurs in both MSS. See
Chron. Mon. Ab., i. p. 440.
4 Printed in Chron. Mon. Ab., i. p. 443.
5 Folio 7 of the volume is actually folio 1 of the Cartulary, and this is on the
verso of the same. It does not occur, so far as has been observed, elsewhere in
the Cartulary, as is the case with the paragraphs preceding it (see Appendix A.
§ 29). It is printed, but very carelessly, in Dugdale, vol. ii. p. 144, probably from
Dr. Langbane's rough transcript : e. g. line 1. Deus omitted ; ab for Abendonensi ;
fuit omitted ; suis for fuisse : memorati for memoratur ; servi for servivit. These
variations seem to point to a bad transcript, and not to the existence of any other
document. The passage in the Cartulary is followed by the rubric Qualiter in-
troducti fuerant Canonici regulares in ipsam ecclesiam, et instituti.
132 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
disposition! servivit. Postea, sicut se habent res mortalium, Regis
cujusdam bcneficio consilii deliberatione, canonicis prefatis sua sunt
rcstituta. Et usque ad annum Incarnationis Dominican Mm. Cm. XXIIdum
eidem ecclcsiae pracfuerunt.
§ 62. "Exjoannis Lelandi Collectaneis \
(See p. 168.)
Anno domini MXLIX. rex Eadwardus tertius, qui sanctus dicitur,
monasterium Sancti Petri Westmonast. reparavit, & possessionibus &
libertatibus largifluis ampliavit. Eodem etiam anno institutio canonicorum
Sanctx Frediswidae de Oxonia.
§ 63. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1049 2.
(See p. 172.)
1 on bysum geare forfterde EadnoS se godat).3 on Oxnafordscire • 3 Oswig
abt>. on pornige ■ ] Wulfno* abb. on Westmynstre. 3 Eadwerd cing geaf
Ulfc his preoste j3 t>.rice • j hit yfele beteah*.
§ 64. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1047 5-
(See p. 172.)
-] eft se papa hsefde sinoS on Uercel . 3 Ulf b. com baerto • ^ forneah man
sceolde tobrecan his stef • gif he ne sealde be mare gersuman6 • for¥an he
ne cu£e don his gerihte swa wel swa he sceolde.
§ 65. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1053 7.
(Seep. 173.)
^ Leofwine *) Wulfwi foran ofer sx ■ 1 leton hig hadian baer to bis-
ceopum. Se Wulfwi feng to Sam biscoprice }>e Ulf haefde be him libben-
dum j of adraefdum.
1 Joannis Lelandi Collectanea, Hearne's edition. London, 1774, vol. iv. p. 72.
Compared with Cottonian MS. Nero D. 2, which it is almost certain is the one
which Leland refers to tinder the title Ex veteri codice Rofensis Monastcrii.
a Printed from Chron. C. Summarized in E and F.
3 The words * Eadnod se goda b.' seem to have been accidentally omitted in D,
and the passage is placed under the year 1050.
4 The following words are substituted in D, instead of the last paragraph : ~\ Ulf
pr. wses geset bam b.rice to hyrde J?e Eadnoft hrefde.
The whole is summarized in E. thus : "J on bam ylcan geare • forSferde EadnoS
f>. be norSan . t sette man Ulf to biscop. And finally in F thus : 1 EadnoS b. be
norSan fordferde . 1 man sette Ulf Sarto. The former appearing under the 1046
and the latter 1048.
5 Printed from Chron. E. Wanting in C, D.
6 The words * gif he . . . . gersuman ' omitted in F, and the paragraph occurs
under the year 1049.
7 Printed from Chronicle C. Apparently wanting in the other Chronicles.
APPENDIX A. 333
Ibid, sub anno 10671.
.... 3 ]>ses daeges forbarn Cristes cyrce on Cantwarebyri • 3 WulfwLb.
forSferde . 3 is bebyrged aet his b. stole on Dorkacestre.
§ 66. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1036 2.
(Seep. 174.)
Her forSferde Cnut cyng act Sceaftesbyrig 3. j sona aefter his forsi^e W3es
ealra witena gemot on Oxnaforda. 3 Leofric eorl . j maest ealle )>a Jjegenas
be norSan Temese • "j |>a liSsmen on Lunden gecuron Harold to healdes
ealles Englelandes • him j hisbnrSer Hardacnute4- J>ewaeson Denemearcon5.
3 Godwine eorl • ~\ ealle J?a yldestan menn on West Seaxon lagon ongean •
swa hi lengost mihton • ac hi ne mihton nan J>ing ongean weal can. 3 man
geraedde )>a f iElfgifu • Hardacnutes modor • saete on Winceastre • mid )>aes
cynges huscarlum hyra suna • 3 heoldan ealle West Seaxan c him to handa •
~] Godwine eorl waes heora healdest man.
§ 67. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1039 7.
(See p. 175.)
Her forSferde Harold cyng on Oxnaforda • on xvi. Ki Apr. • 3 he waes
bebyrged act Westmynstre.
§ 68. Ex MS. Cotton Aug. A. II, fcl. 908.
(Seep. 175.)
Her ky)> on )>ison gewrite f harold king . . . . )>a geraedde eadsige arceb J>a
he J>is wiste. 3 eall se hired aet xpes cyrc betweonan heom f man sende
aelfgar munuc of xpes cyrc to harolde kingce • 3 waes se king J>a binnan
oxanaforde swyj>e geseocled • swa f he laeg orwenae his lifes • |>a waes
lyfingc t> of defenanscire • mid J>am kincge. J }>ancred munuc mid him • \>a.
com cristes cyrc sand to ]>& t>. j he forS J)a to )>am kincge • 3 aelfgar munuc
mid hf • j oswerd aet hergerdes ha • ] )>ancred. 3 saedon J>2 kinge, &c.
§ 69. Ex MS. Cotton Faust, A. HI, fol. 103 9.
(See p. 176.)
Eadward kyng gret Wlsy biscop, and GyrS erl, and alle mfne J>eignes on
Oxnefordes^re frendlic ; and ich cfSe ou £at ic habbe gifen Crist and sainte
1 Printed from Chron. D. Apparently wanting in all the others.
2 Printed from Chron. E. All reference to Oxford omitted in C, D, and F,
and the whole much summarized.
3 Sceftesbyrig C. Scieftesbyri F. * Hardecnute F. Cnutes sunu C, D.
5 Denmarcan F. 6 Westsexan F.
7 Printed from Chron. E. Chrons. C, D and F do not mention Oxford, and
only F mentions that Harold was buried at Westminster.
8 Printed in Kemble's Codex Diplomatics, No. DCCLVlli, vol. iv. p. 56. Also
in Facsimiles of Ancient Charters in the British Museum, a.d. 624-1066, p. 4.
1878.
9 Printed in Kemble's Codex Diplomaticus, No. dccclxii, vol. iv. p. 215.
334 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Pctrc into Wcstminstrc ^at cotlif £e ic was boren innc bi naman Gi^slepe
and .ine hyde at Mcrsce scotfr6 and gafolfre, mid alien ^ara bngan £a ^6rt6
belimpa¥, on wode and on felde, and made and on watere, mid chirchen
and mid chirche s6cne, sua* ful sw£ for$ and swd free svvd it mesilfon on
hande st6d, and swii swd iElgiue Imme mm m6der on minre firm-birde
dage t6 forme gife it me gaef and t6 gekinde biqua^.
§ 70. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 10651.
(Seep. 181.)
-] ba wel ra^e baraefter waes mycel gemot act Nor^hamtune . ~\ swa on
Oxenaforda • on bon daeig Simonis "] hide . -} waes Harold eorl bar • ~\ wolde
heora seht wyrcan • gif he mihte • ac he na mihte • ac call hys eorldom
hyne anraidlice fors6c j geutlagode • 3 ealle ba mid hym be unlage raerdon •
forbam be [he] rypte God aerost . ~\ ealle ba bestrypte be he ofer mihte- art
life -] xt lande • 3 hig namon heom ba Morkere to corle • 3 Tostig for j>a
ofer sx.
§ 71. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 10652.
(Seep. 181.)
.... per com Harold eorl heom togeanes . ~] hig laegdon aerende on hine to
bam cyninge Eadwarde • j eac aerendracan mid him sendon • ~\ b£don ■)> hi
moston habban Morkere heom to eorle • 3 se cyning Jjaes geu^ae ■ ~\ sende
aefter Haralde heom to Hamtune • on See Symones ~] Iuda maesse aefen • "j
ky^de heom f ilee • ] heom f ahand sealde • 3 he nywade baer Gnutes lage.
§ 72. Florentii Wigorniensis Chron., sub anno 10653.
(See p. 182.)
Omnes dehinc fere comitatus illius in unum congregati, Haroldo West-
Saxonum duci, et aliis quos rex, Tostii rogatu, pro pace redintegranda ad
eos miserat, in Northamtonia occurrerunt. Ubi prius, et post apud Oxne-
fordam die festivitatis apostolorum Simonis et Judae, dum Haroldus et alii
quamplures comitem Tostium cum eis pacificare vellent, omnes unanimi
consensu contradixerunt.
§ 73. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1065 4.
(See p. 183.)
•j J>a Ry^renan dydan mycelne hearm abutan Hamtune • ba hwile J>e he
f6r heora aerende • aegbaer f hi ofslogon menn . 3 baerndon hus 3 corn • 3
1 Printed from Chronicle C. There is no mention of the gemot under D and E,
while F has ceased with the year 1057.
2 Printed from Chronicle D. A, B, and F have ceased. The record of the year
is given differently in C and E.
3 Printed in Monumenta Hist. Brit., p. 612.
1 Printed from Chronicle D.
APPENDIX A. 335
namon eall f orf J>e hig mihton to cuman . )>aet waes feola )>usend • 3 fela
hund manna hi naman • 3 laeddan norS mid heom • swa f seo scir • 3 j>a
o^ra scira )>ae £aer neah sindon • wurdan fela wintra £e wyrsan.
Passages quoted from Chapter X. — Oxford during the
Twenty Years after the Norman Conquest.
§ 74. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1066 1.
(Seep. 187.)
3 Wyllelm eorl for eft ongean to Haestingan • 3 geanbidode }>aer hwarSer
man him bugan to wolde. Ac J>a he ongeat f man him to cuman nolde • he
f6r upp mid eallon his here ]>e him to lafe waes • 3 him sy^an fram ofer
S93 c6m • 3 hergode ealne J>one ende \>e he oferferde • o^ f he com to
Beorhhamstede. 3 ]>aer him com ongean Ealdred arceb. • 3 Eadgar cild • 3
Eadwine eorl • 3 Morkere eorl . 3 ealle J>a betstan men of Lundene . 3
bugon j>a for neode • ]>a maest waes to hearme ged6n. 3 f waes micel unraed
•f man aeror swa ne dyde • J>a hit God betan nolde for urum synnum . 3
gysledan • 3 sworon him a^as • 3 he heom behet f he wolde heom hold
hlaford beon • 3 }>eah onmang |)isan hi hergedan eall f hi oferforon. Da
on midwintres daeg hine halgode to kynge Ealdred arceb. on Westmynstre •
3 he sealde him on hand mid Xpes bee • 3 eac sw6r • aerjjan \>e he wolde J>a
corona him on heafode settan • $ he wolde j>isne Jjeodscype swa wel haldan
swa aenig knygc aetforan him betst dyde • gif hi him holde beon woldon.
Swa )>eah leide gyld on mannum swrSe stfS • 3 f6r |>a on J>am Lengtene
ofer s£ to Normandfge ■ 3 nam mid him Stigand arceb. 3 iEgelna"o abb.
on Gibr. ■ 3 Eadgar cild . 3 Eadwine eorl • 3 Morkere eorl • 3 WaelJ>eof
eorl • 3 manege o£re gode men of Englalande.
§ 75. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1066 2.
(Seep. 187.)
3 J>a hwile com Willelm eorl upp aet Hestingan • on See Michaeles
maessedaeg. 3 Harold com norSan • 3 him wrS gefeaht ear )>an j>e his here
come eall . 3 J>aer he feoll • 3 his twaegen gebmfera • GyrS 3 Leofwine • and
Willelm J)is land geeode • 3 com to Westmynstre • 3 Ealdred arceb. hine
to cynge gehalgode • 3 menn guidon him gyld 3 gislas sealdon • 3sy^ ^an
heora land obhtan.
§ 76. Ex Florenlii Wigorniensis Chron., sub anno 1066 3.
(Seep. 187.)
Interea comes Willelmus Suth-Saxoniam, Cantiam, Suthamtunensem
provinciam, Suthregiam, Middel-Saxoniam, Heortfordensem provinciam
1 Printed from Chronicle D.
2 Printed from Chronicle E. Wanting in the others.
3 Printed in Monumenta Hist. Brit., p. 615.
336 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
dcvastabat ; et villas cremare, honiinesquc intcrficcre non cessabat, donee
ad villain quae Beorcham nominatur, veniret. Ubi Aldredus archiepisco-
pus, Wulstanus Wigornensis episcopus, Walterus Herefordensis episcopus,
clito Eadgarus, comites Eadwinus et Morcarus, et de Lundonia quiquc
nobiliores, cum multis aliis ad eum venerunt, et datis obsidibus, illi dedi-
tioneni lecerunt, fidelitatemque juraverunt. Cum quibus et ipse foedus
pepigit ; et nihilominus exercitui suo villas cremare, et rapinas agere per-
misit. Appropinquante igitur Dominicae Nativitatis festivitate, cum omni
exercitu Lundoniam ut ibi in regem sublimaretur adiit. Et quia Stigandus
primas totius Angliae, ab apostolico papa calumniatus est pallium non sus-
cepisse canonice, ipsa Nativitatis die, quae illo anno feria secunda evenit,
ab Aldredo Eboracensium archiepiscopo in Westmonasterio consecratus
est honorifice.
§ 77. Ex Willelmi Malmcsbiriensis de Gestis Regum, Lib. III. § 247 !.
(See p. 188.)
Sensim ergo Willelmus (ut triumphatorem decebat) cum exercitu, non
hostili sed regali modo progrediens, urbem regni maximam Londoniam
petit ; moxque cum gratulatione cives omnes effusi obviam vadunt. Pro-
rupit omnibus portis unda salutantium, auctoribus magnatibus, praecipue
Stigando archiepiscopo Gantuariensi et Aldredo Eboracensi : nam praece-
dentibus diebus, Edwinus et Morcardus, amplae spei fratres, apud Lon-
doniam audito interitus Haroldi nuncio, urbanos sollicitaverant ut alter-
utrum in regnum sublevarent ; quod frustra conati, Northanhimbriam
discesserant, ex suo conjectantes ingenio nunquam illuc Willelmum esse
venturum. Caeteri proceres Edgarum eligerent si episcopos assertores
haberent Tunc ille, haud dubie rex conclamatus, die Natalis
Domini coronatus est ab Aldredo archiepiscopo.
§ 78. Ex Henrici Huntcridunensis Historia : Lib. VI. § 30 2.
(See p. 188.)
Willelmus vero tanta potitus victoria, susceptus est a Londoniensibus
pacifice, et coronatus est apud Westminster ab Aldredo Eborancensi archi-
episcopo.
§ 79. Ex Guillelmi Pictavensis Gestis Guillelmi Ducis*.
(Seep. 189.)
Praemissi illo equites Normanni quingenti, egressam contra se aciem
refugere intra moenia impigre compellunt, terga cedentes. Multae stragi
addunt incendium, cremantes quicquid acdificiorum citra flumen inve-
nere ut malo duplici superba ferocia contundatur. Dux progrediens dein
1 Printed from the edition by the English Historical Society, 1840, vol. ii. p. 421.
a Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series 1879, p. 204.
3 Printed in Duchesne's Hisioriae Normannorum Scriptorcs, 161 9, p. 205, and in
Migne, vol. cxlix. col. 1258.
APPENDIX A. 337
quoquoversum placuit, transmeato flumine Tamesi, vado simul atque
ponte ad oppidum Guarengefort pervenit. Adveniens eodem Stigandus
Pontifex Metropolitanus manibus ei sese dedit fidem sacramento confir-
mavit, abrogans Adelinum quern leviter elegerat. Hinc procedenti, statim
ut Lundonia conspectui patebat, obviam exeunt Principes civitatis ; sese
cunctamque civitatem in obsequium illius, quemadmodum ante Cantuarii
tradunt obsides, quos et quot imperat adducunt.
§ 80. Ex Willelmi Gemmelicensis Monachi Historia Normannorum :
Lib. VII. cap. 37 1.
(Seep. 189.)
Mane vero Dominicae diei illucescente, spoliis hostium distractis, et
corporibus charorum suorum sepultis iter arripuit, quod Londoniam tendit.
Deinde ad urbem Warengefort gressum divertit, transmeatoque vado fluvii,
legiones ibi castra metari jussit. Inde vero profectus, Londoniam est
aggressus ; ubi praecursores milites venientes, in platea urbis plurimos inve-
nerunt rebelles, resistere toto conamine decertantes. Cum quibus statim
congressi, non minimum luctum intulerunt urbi, ob filiorum ac civium
suorum plurima funera. Videntes demum Lundonii se diutius contra stare
non posse, datis obsidibus se suaque omnia nobilissimo victori supposuere.
Anno itaque ab Incarnatione Domini mlxvi. Willelmus Normannorum
Dux, quern stylus noster extollere non sufficit, nobile trophaeum, ut supra
dictum est, ex Anglis confecit. Deinde in die Natalis Domini, ab omnibus
tarn Normannorum quam Anglorum proceribus Rex est electus, et sacro
oleo ab Episcopis regni delibutus, atque regali diademate coronatus.
§81. Ex Guillelmi Pictavensis Gestis Gidllelmi Ducis 2.
(See p. 189.)
Egressus e Lundonia, dies aliquot in propinquo loco morabatur Bercingis
dum firmamenta quaedam in urbe contra mobilitatem ingentis ac feri
populi perficerentur. Vidit enim in primis necessarium magnopere London-
ienses coerceri. Ibi veniunt ad obsequium ejus Eduinus et Morcardus
maximi fere omnium Anglorum genere ac potentia Algardi illius nomina-
tissimi filii, deprecantur veniam, etc.
§ 82. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 1067 3.
(See p. 196.)
Her com se kyng eft ongean to Englalande on See Nicolaes maesse-
daege ....-] her se kyng sette micel.gyld on earm folc • ~j beahhwae^re
let aefre hergian eall f hi oferforon. And ba he ferde to Defena [scire] ■ ~]
1 Printed in Duchesne's Historia Normannorum Script ores, ^>. 287. The passage
from William of Jumieges is given for the sake of comparison with that of
"William of Poitiers. How far they are taken one from the other, or both from a
common original, it is difficult to determine.
a Printed in Duchesne, Ibid. p. 208 ; Migne, cxlix. col. 1262.
3 Printed from Chronicle E. Wanting entirely in all the others.
Z
J38 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
besaet ba burh Exancestcr xvm dagas • ] baer wearS micel his heres
forfarcn . ac lie hcom wcl behct • ~\ yfelc gelacste .... On }>isan Eastron
com se kyng to Wincestre • •} }>a wacron Eastra on x Kf. Aprf. j sona aefter
bam c6m Mathild sco hlaefdie hider to lande • ■} Ealdfed arceb. hig gehal-
gode to cwenc on \\ cstmynstre . on Hwitan Sunnan daeg. pa ky*de man
ban kyningc $ f folc be nor&in haefdon heom gcgaderad togaedere • 3
woldon him ongean standan . gif he come. He for ba to Snotingaham • 3
worhte baer castel • 3 f6r swa to Eoferwic • 3 baer worhte twegen castelas
3 on Lincolna • 3 gehvvar on ban ende.
§ 83. Ex Florentii Wigorniensis Chron. sub anno 1067 \
(See p. 196.)
Posthaec,hieme imminente, rex Willelmusde Normannia Angliam rediit,
et Anglis importable tributum imposuit. Dein in Domnoniam hostiliter
profectus civitatem Execestram, quam cives et nonnulli Anglici ministri
contra ilium retinebant, obsedit et cito infregit.
§ 84. Willelmi Malmesbiriensis de Gesiis Regum, Libro III. § 248 2.
(See p. 196.)
Omnium deinde bellorum quae gessit, haec summa est. Urbem Exoniam
rebellantem leviter subegit, divino scilicet Justus auxilio, quod pars muralis
ultro decidens, ingressum 1111 patefecerit : nam et ipse audacius earn as-
silierat, protestans homines irreverentes Dei destituendos suffragio ; quia
unus eorum, supra murum stans, nudato inguine auras sonitu inferioris
partis turbaverat, pro contemptu videlicet Normannorum. Eboracum,
unicum rebellionum suffugium,civibus pene delevit, fame et ferronecatis, &c.
§ 85. Ex Roger i de Wendover Chronic is 3.
(See p. 198.)
Qualiter Rex Willelmus Exoniam obsedit, et cepit. Eodem tempore rex
Willelmus urbem Exoniam sibi rebellem obsidione vallavit. Ubi quidam
stans super murum nudato inguine sonitu partis inferioris auras turbavit,
in contemptum videlicet Normannorum. Unde Willelmus in iram con-
versus civitatem levi negotio subjugavit. Deinde Eboracum petens earn
penitus delevit.
§ 86. Ex Regis tro de Oseneia \
(See p. 208.)
Memorandum quod Robertus de Oleio et Rogerus de Ivreio fratres
jurati, et per fidem et sacramentum confederati venerunt ad conquestum
Angliae cum rege Willelmo Bastard.
1 Printed from the edition by the English Historical Society, ed. 1849, vol. ii. p. 1.
3 Ibid., 1840, vol. ii. p. 421.
;; Ibid., 1 841, vol. ii. p. 4. This is taken from the MS. in the BodleianLibrary,
Douce, ccvii.
4 Printed from Bodleian MS. Tanner Misc. xii. folio 72 b, under the heading
'Ex Registro Chartarum Bpectantium abbatiae de Oseney in Com. Oxon.' The
APPENDIX A. 339
Iste rex dedit dicto Roberto duas Baronias quae modo vocantur Baronia
Doylivorum et S. Walerici.
Anno ab incarnatione Domini 1071 aedificatum est castellum Oxon tem-
pore Regis Willelmi predicti. Iste Robertus de Olleyo dedit fratri suo
Rogero predicto Baroniam quae modo vocatur Sancti Walerici.
Anno domini 1074 fundata est ecclesia Sancti Georgii in Castello Oxon,
a Roberto de Olleyo primo, et Rogero de Ivr' tempore regis Willelmi
Bastard. Qui in dicta ecclesia canonicos seculares instituerunt et certos
redditus de duabus Baroniis praedictis eisdem consignaverunt cum ecclesiis,
decimis, terris, et possessionibus et rebus aliis.
Notum sit omnibus fidelibus sanctae ecclesiae tarn presentibus quam
futuris, quod ego Robertus de Olleyo, volentibus et concedentibus Alditha
uxore mea et fratribus meis Nigello et Gilberto, dedi et concessi
Deo, et ecclesiae S. Georgii in castello Oxenforde et canonicis in ea Deo
servientibus, et eorum successoribus quam ecclesiam pro salute Regis Hen-
rici et columitate totius regni omnes res, tenementa, decimas et
possessiones subscriptas, videl. ecclesiam S. Mariae Magdalenae, quae sita
est in suburbio Oxenforde, cum tribus hidis terrae in Walton, &c.
§ 87. Ex Regis tro de Oseneia\
(See p. 208.)
Sciant presentes et futuri quod ego Rogerus de Ivereio2 pro salute
Domini Regis et totius regni necnon pro salute domini mei Roberti de
Olleyo et Aldithe uxoris suae et meorum salute, concessi et praesenti
carta mea3 confirmavi Deo et ecclesiae S. Georgii quae sita est in Castello
Oxon, omnes terras, et tenementa, decimas, redditus, et possessiones quas
dictus Robertus de Olleyo de Baroniis suis 4 dedit, et concessit, et assig-
navit, &c.
§ 88. Ex Chron. Monaster ii de Abingdon*.
(See p. 212.)
Ejus temporibus, et temporibus duorum regum, scilicet Willelmi, qui
Anglos devicerat, et filii ejus Willelmi, erat quidam constabularius Oxoniae,
passages are printed in substance in Kennett's Parochial Antiquities, Oxon. 181 8,
vol. i. pp. 78 and 81, as from Sutton's transcript, Ch. Ch. and Glover's Collectanea.
The early part of the Oseney Chartulary, whence no doubt the passages were
transcribed before the fire, seems to be wanting.
J Printed from the passage as given in Kennett's Parochial Aiitiquities, 181 8,
vol. i. p. 83, and compared with the transcript in Bodleian MS. Tanner Misc. xii.
folio 72 b. See note to previous extract, but the result from the various sources is
not altogether satisfactory. The English version given in the text, however, shows
how far these copies can be relied on, and where they are incomplete.
2 Robertus de Iverey (erroneously). Tanner.
3 ' et meorum . . . carta mea.' Omitted Tanner.
4 ' de Baroniis suis.' Omitted Kennett.
5 Printed in Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series, 1858, vol. ii. p. 12, from Cottonian
MS. B. vi. The passage does not occur in Claud. C. ix.
Z 2
}40 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Robertas de Oili dictus, in cujus custodia erat illo tempore provincia ilia in
pracceptis et in tact is, adeo ut dc ore regis proferretur illi actio. Dives
enim valde erat ; diviti nee pauperi parcebat exigere ab eis pecunias sibique
gazas multiplicari. Sicut qui brevi versiculo de similibus comprehendit,
dicens : . ~ .. . . . . ,
1 Grescit amor numim quantum pecunia crescit.
Ecclesias vero cupiditate pecuniarum infestabat ubique, maxime abbatiam
Abbendoniae, scilicet possessiones abstractae, et frequenter in placitis gra-
vare, quandoque in misericordiam regis ponere. Inter caetera mala, pratum
quoddam extra muros Oxoniae situm, conscntiente rege, a monasterio ab-
straxit, et in usum militum castelli deputavit. Pro quo damno contristati
sunt fratres Abbendonenses magis quam pro aliis malis. Tunc si.nul con-
gregati ante altare Sanctae Mariae, quod dedicaverat Sanctus Dunstanus
archiepiscopus et Sanctus Atheluualdus episcopus, cum lacrimis prostrati in
terrain deprecantes de Roberto de Oili, monasterii depraedatore, vindictam
facere, aut ilium ad satisfactionem convertere.
Interea, dum sic per dies et noctes Beatam Mariam invocassent, de-
cidit ipse Robertus in aegritudinc valida, in qua laborabat multis diebus
impoenitens, donee videbatur ei quadam nocte in palatio cujusdam regis
magni, Sec.
§ 89. Ex Chron. Monasterii de Abingdonx.
(Seep. 215.)
Post praedictam autem visionem quam viderat, jussu Dei Genitricis se a
satellitibus malis torqueri, non tantum ecclesiam Sanctae Mariae de Ab-
bendonia curabat erigere, verum etiam alias parochianas ecclesias dirutas,
videlicet infra muros Oxenefordiae et extra, ex sumptu suo reparavit. Nam
sicut ante visionem illam depraedator ecclesiarum et pauperum erat, ita
postea effectus est reparator ecclesiarum et recreator pauperum, multo-
rumque bonorum operum patrator. Inter caetera pons magnus ad sep-
temtrionalem plagam Oxoniae per eum factus est. Qui mense Septembris
obiens in capitulo Abbendonensi in parte aquilonis sepulturam meruit ;
uxor autem ejus in sinistra ejus condita requiescat.
§ 90. Carta Willelmi Regis. Per Inspeximus2.
(See p. 217.)
W. Rex Anglorum T. Vicecomiti, omnibusque vicecomitibus episcopatis
Remigii episcopi, salutem. Sciatis me transtulisse sedem episcopatus Dor-
chacestrensis in Lincolniam civitatem, auctoritate et consilio Alexandri
papae et legatorum ejus; necnon et L. archiepiscopi, et aliorum episcopo-
rum regni mei ; ac ibidem terram ab omnibus consuetudinibus solutam et
quiet am sufficienter dedisse, ad construendum matrem ecclesiam totius
episcopatus, et ejusdem officinas Testibus L. Archiepiscopo, et E.
Vicecomite.
1 Printed in Chron. A/on. Ab., Rolls Scries. [858, vol. ii. p. 14.
a Printed from the copy in Dugdale's Monasticon, ed. 1846, vol. viii. p. 1269,
but compared with the Inspeximus in the Patent Roll. 8th Hen. VI. Pt. ii.
memb. 10.
APPENDIX A. 341
§ 91. Ex Chron. Abbatiae de Evesham \
(See p. 218.)
Quum praedicti fratres ad Oxinefordiam fulti reliquiis sancti Ecgwini
laetabundi pervenissent, et verbum Dei, populo spectante, praedicassent,
quidam vir magnae, ut postmodum claruit, fidei, ad feretrum sancti Ecg-
wini inter caeteros humiliter accessit, ternas orationes coram cunctis de-
votissime complevit, et per singulas preces manum ad marsupium mittens
indeque triplicem oblationem sumens, sancto Dei fideliter obtulit.
Passages quoted in Chapter XI. — The Description of Oxford in
1086 as given in the Domesday Survey.
§ 92. From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle^ sub anno 1085 2.
(See p. 222.)
After bisum haefde se cyng mycel ge^eaht and swi^e deope spaece wi£>
his witan ymbe bis land hu hit waere gesett • o^e mid hwilcon mannon.
Sende ba ofer eall Englaland into aelcere scire his men • j lett agan ut hu
fela hundred hyda waeron innon baere scire • o^e hvvet se cyng him sylf
haefde landes 3 orfes innan bam lande • o^e hwilce gerihtae he ahte to
habbanne to xn. monSum of baere scire. Eac he lett gewritan hu mycel
landes his arcebiscopas haefdon • ~\ his leodbiscopas • j his abbotas • ] his
eorlas . 3 beah ic hit lengre telle ■ hwaet o^e hu mycel aelc mann haefde • be
landsittende waes innan Englalande • on lande o%"$e on orfe • 3 hu mycel
feos hit waere wur^. Swa swy^e nearwelice he hit lett ut aspyrian • f naes
an aelpig hide ne an gyrde landes • ne furSon • hit is sceame to tellanne • ac
hit ne }>uhte him nan sceame to donne • an oxe • ne an cu • ne an swin naes
belyfon • f naes gesaet on his ge write. ~) ealle J>a gewrita waeron gebroht to
him sy^an.
§ 93. Ex Libro Censuali de Domesday \
(See p. 225.)
Tempore Regis Edwardi Reddebat Oxeneford
pro theloneo et gablo et omnibus aliis consuetudinibus per annum
regi quidem xx libras et vi sextarios mellis. Comiti vero Algaro
x libras adjuncto molino quern infra civitatem habebat.
Quando rex ibat in expeditionem burgenses xx ibant
cum eo pro omnibus aliis, vel xx libras dabant regi ut omnes essent liberi.
1 Printed from the edition in the Rolls Series, 1863, p. 55, and this chiefly from
MS. in Bodleian Library, Rawlinson A. 287.
2 Printed from Chronicle E. (i. e. the Peterborough Chronicle, Bodl. Laud. 636),
the only one of the series continued to this date.
3 From the Domesday Survey, folio 154 a, cols. 1 and 2. See frontispiece to the
present volume.
343 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Modo reddit OxENEFORD Ix libras ad numcrum dc xxfI in ora.
In ipsa villa lam intra inurum quam extra sunt cc et xliii domus
reddentes geldum ct exceptis his sunt ibi quingentae domus xxii minus
ita vastac et destructae quod geldum non possunt reddere.
Rex liabet xx mansiones murales quae fuerunt Algari [comitis] Tempore
Regis Edwardi,
reddentes tunc et modo xiv solidos ii denarios minus.
et unam mansionem habet reddentcm vi denarios pertinentes ad Scip-
tone, et aliam de
iv denarios pertinentes ad Blochesham et tcrciam reddentem xxx denarios
pertinentes ad Rise-
berge et ij alias de iiij denariispertinentibusadTuiforde in Buchingeham-
scire. Una ex his est vasta.
Propterea vocantur murales mansiones quia si opus fuerit et rex prece-
perit murum reficient.
Ad terras quas tenuit Albericus comes pertinent j ecclesia et iij mansiones.
harum ij jacent ad ecclesiam Sanctae Mariae reddentes xxviij denarios,
et tercia jacet ad Bureford reddens v solidos.
Ad terras quas W. comes tenuit pertinent ix mansiones reddentes vij
solidos.
Ex his sunt iij vastae.
Archiepiscopus cantuariensis habet vij mansiones reddentes xxxviij dena-
rios. Ex his
iiij sunt vastae. Episcopus Wintoniensis ix mansiones reddentes lxij
denarios. Ex his
iij sunt vastae. Episcopus Baiocensis xviij mansiones reddentes xiij solidos
et iiij denarios
Ex his iiij sunt vastae. Episcopus Lincolniensis habet xxx mansiones
reddentes [sis
xviij solidos et vi denarios. Ex his xvi sunt vastae. Episcopus Constantien-
habet ij mansiones reddentes xiiij denarios. Episcopus Herefordensis
habet iij mansiones
reddentes xiij denarios. Ex his una vasta est.
Abbatia de Sancto Edmundo habet i mansionem reddentem vi denarios
pertinentes ad Tentone.
Abbatia de Abendonia habet xiiij mansiones reddentes vij solidos et iij
denarios.
Ex his viij sunt vastae. Abbatia de Eglesham habet i ecclesiam et xiij.
mansiones reddentes ix solidos. Ex his vii sunt vastae.
Comes Moritonensis habet x mansiones reddentes iij solidos. Omnes sunt
vastac prcter unam. Comes Hugo habet vij mansiones reddentes v
solidos.
et viij denarios. Ex his iiij sunt vastae. Comes Ebroicensis habet i.
mansionem vastam et nil redciit.
Henricus de Fereires habet ij mansiones reddentes v solidos.
Wiilelmus Peurcl iiij mansiones reddentes xvij denarios. Ex his
sunt vastae.
Edwardus Vicecomes ij mansiones reddentes v solidos.
APPENDIX A. 343
Ernulfus de Hesding iij mansiones reddentes xviij denarios. Ex his i
vasta est.
Berengarius de Todeni i mansionem reddentem vi denarios.
Milo Crespin ij mansiones reddentes xij denarios.
Ricardus de Gurci ij mansiones reddentes xix denarios.
Robertus de Oilgi xij mansiones reddentes Ixiiij denarios. Ex his iiijor
sunt vastae.
Rogerus de Iuri xv mansiones reddentes xx solidos et iiij denarios. Ex
his vi sunt vastae.
Rannulf Flammard unam mansionem nil reddentem.
Wido de Reinbodcurth ij mansiones reddentes xx denarios.
Walterius Gifard xvii mansiones reddentes xxii solidos. Ex his vii sunt
vastae.
Unam ex his habuit antecessor Walterii dono regis Edwardi ex viiijt0 virgis
quae consuetudinariae erant Tempore Regis Edwardi.
Jernio habet i mansionem reddentem vi denarios pertinentes ad Hamtone.
Filius Manassae habet unam mansionem reddentem iiij denarios ad Bleces-
done.
Hi omnes prescripti tenent has praedictas mansiones liberas
propter reparationem muri.
Omnes mansiones quae vocantur murales Tempore Regis Edwardi liberae
erant ab omni
consuetudine excepta expeditione et muri reparatione.
Presbyteri Sancti Michaelis habent ij mansiones reddentes Hi denarios.
Canonici Sancti Fridesuidae habent xv mansiones reddentes xi solidos.
Ex his viiito sunt vastae
Coleman habuit dum vixit iii mansiones de iij solidis et viiit0 denarios.
Willelmus habet unam de xx denarios. Spracheling i mansionem quae
nil reddit.
Wluuius piscator i mansionem de xxxij denariis.
Aluuinus habet v mansiones de xxxvii denariis. Ex his sunt] iij vastae.
Edricus i mansionem quae nil reddit. Harding et Leueua ix
mansiones reddentes xij solidos. Ex his iiij sunt vastae.
Ailric i mansionem quae nil reddit. Dereman i mansionem de xii denariis.
Segrim i mansionem de xvi denariis. Alius Segrim i mansionem de ii
solidis.
Srneuuinus i mansionem quae nil reddit. Golduinus i mansionem nil
reddentem.
Eddid i mansionem nil reddentem. Suetman i mansionem de viij denariis.
Seuui i mansionem nil reddentem. Leueua i mansionem vastam de x
denariis Tempore Regis Edwardi.
Alueua i mansionem de x denariis. Aluuardus i mansionem de x denariis.
Aluuinus i mansionem vastam. Brictred et Derman i mansionem de xvi
denariis.
Aluuius i mansionem de qua nil habet. Dereuuen i mansionem de vi
denariis.
Aluuinus [presbyter] i domum vastam quae nil reddit Leuric iam
similiter nil reddentem.
344 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Wlui ic i mansiohem vastam et tamen si opus fiierit murum rcparabit.
Suetman monetarius i domum liberam reddentem xl denarios.
Goduinus i. Vlmarus i. Godcrun i. Godric i. Aluui i. hac v.
nil reddunt. Suetman ii mansioncs muri habet redden tes iii solidos.
Alter Suetman i mansionem liberam pro eodem servicio et habet ix
denarios.
Sauuoldus ix mansioncs reddentes xiij solidos. Ex his vi sunt vastae.
Lodouuinus i domum in qua manet liberam pro muro.
Segrim iii domos liberas de lxiiij denariis. Harum i vasta est.
Aluuinus i domum liberam pro muro refieiendo ; de hac habet
xxxii denarios per annum. Et si mums, dum opus est per eum, qui debet,
non restauratur, aut xl solidos regi emendabit aut domum
suam perdit.
Omnes burgenses oxeneford habent communiter extra murum pasturam
reddentem vi solidos et viii denarios.
§ 94. Ex Libro Censuali de Domesday. — Terra Robert i de Oi/gi1.
(See p. 226.)
Idem Robertus habet xlii domus hospitatas in Oxeneford tarn
intra murum quam extra. Ex his xvi reddunt geldum et gablum.
Aliae neutrum reddunt quia prae paupertatem non possunt ; et viii
mansiones
habet vastas, et xxx acras prati juxta murum, et molinum x solidorum.
Totum valet iij libras et pro i manerio tenet cum beneficio S. Petri.
Ibid.2
Ecclesia Sancti Petri de Oxeneford tenet de Roberto ij hidas in
Haliwelle.
Terra, i carucata. Ibi est una caruca et dimidium ; et xxiij homines
hortulos habentes.
Ibi xl acrae prati. Valuit xx solidos. Modo xl solidos.
Haec terra non geldavit nee ullum debitum reddidit.
§ 95. Carta Regis Willclmi. Ex Regis tro Eynshamensi7, .
(See p. 242.)
Willelmus rex Anglorum episcopis et omnibus fidelibus suis per Angliam
salutem. Sciatis me confirmasse donationem quae Lcofricus comes et
Godiva sua conjux ecclesiae sanctae Mariae Stowensi dederunt, scilicet. . . .
Praeterea concedo praedictae ecclesiae, deprecatione Remigii episcopi,
1 Domesday Survey, folio 158 a, col. 2. The rest of the sentence after S. Petri
appears to be wanting.
8 Ibid, folio 158 b, col. 1.
3 Printed in Dugdale's Monasticon, vol. iii. p. 14. From the Eynsham Register
in the possession of the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church. Catalogue No.
XXXVI, folio 10.
APPENDIX A. 345
Egneshamensem ecclesiam cum terris quas modo possidet, tali pacto, ut ibi
abbas per meum consilium ordinetur, qui res ecclesiarum semper tractet. . .
Et hoc facio consilio et testamento L. archiepiscopi. Testes E. vicecomes
et R. de Oili.
§ 96. Item Carta Regis Willelmi. Ex eodem Registro \
(See p. 242.)
Willelmus rex Angliae, hominibus abbatiae de La Stousalutem. Praecipio
vobis omnibus, ut ita sitis obedientes domino vestro Columbano abbati
sicut fuistis Remigio episcopo in omnibus rebus. Teste Ricardo de Curci.
§97. Confirmatio Remigii Episcopi. Ex eodem Registro 2.
(See p. 243.)
.... Addo etiam praeterea eidem gloriosissimae Dei genitricis ecclesiae,
sibique famulantibus monachis, augmentum quoddam insigne Egnesham-
ensem, cum eodem pago in quo antiquitus construitur, caeterisque sibi
membris adhaerentibus, Scipfort scilicet et Rollendricht, necnon Aerdin-
tona atque Micletuna, quadam quoque ecclesiola sanctae Aebbae in urbe
Oxenefordensi consita, cum reculis sibi devotione pia fidelium collatis,
atque etiam duobus molendinis secus ejusdem urbis aquarum decursus
pridem erectis, cum universis quoque jure sibi appendicibus, supradicto
modo perpetualiter optinenda annuo, strictimque connecto.
§ 98. Carta Regis Henrici senior is de omnibus terris nostris.
Ex eodem Registro 3.
(See p. 243.)
Et in Oxeneford ecclesiam sanctae Aebbae et omnia quae ad earn perti-
nent. Et duos molendinos juxta Oxeneford et prata, et Aerdintonam,
et quicquid Robertus Lincolniensis episcopus dedit pro commutatione
Newerchae et Stowe ; . . . . Willielmus Alius Nigelli unam domum apud
Oxeneford dedit. Hardingus de Oxeneford, qui in Hierusalem ivit et ibi
mortuus est, duas domus apud Oxeneford dedit, unam intra burgum, aliam
extra. Gillebertus de Damari unam domum dedit extra burgum, excepta
consuetudine regis. Willielmus filius Bernardi decimam suam dedit eidem
ecclesiae.
§ 99. Ex Libro Censuali de Domesday. — Terra Canonicorum de
Oxeneford et aliorum Clericorum 4.
(See p. 262.)
Canonici Sanctae Fridesvidae tenent iiij hidas de rege juxta
Oxeneford. Ipsi tenuerunt. Tempore Regis Edwardi. Terra v
carucatae. Ibi xviii villani
1 Printed in Dugdale's Monasticon, vol. iii. p. 14, MS. folio n.
2 Ibid. p. 15, MS. folio 11. 3 Ibid. pp. 15-16.
* Domesday, folio 157 a, col 1.
346 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
habent v Caracas ; ct cv acras prati ct viij acras spineti. Valuit et valet
xl solidos.
Haec terra nunquam geldavit, ncc alicui Hundredo pertinet ncque
pcrtinuit.
Siuuardus tenet de ipsis canonieis ij hidas in Codeslam1.
Terra ij carucatac quae [earucae] modo ibi sunt. Valuit et valet xl
solidos De aeeelesia fuit et est'-.
§ ioo. Ex Chron. Monasterii de Abingdon \
(See p. 264.)
De Domo Infirmorum.
Quia infirmi fratres et qui opus habebant minui sanguine, igne carebant,
idem abbas Faritius consensu totius capituli concessit omnes redditus eis
mansionum subnotatarum, quas in Oxenefordia ipsemet cmerat; quatenus,
cum necessarium foret, ignis exhibitio domui infirmorum praesto adesset.
Et hoc concessit pro suae animae redemptionc, et infirmorum compassione,
et quicumque hoc irritum faceret anathematizavit.
Hae sunt illae mansiones cum redditibus.
Terra Wlfwi piscatoris, v solidos et viii denarios.
Terra Rualdi, v solidos et ii denarios.
Terra Dermanni presbyteri, vii solidos et ii denarios.
Terra Colemanni, viii solidos.
Terra Eadwini monetarii, et fratris Ejus v solidos.
Deo itaque alienus et regno Ejus exsors in perpetuum habeatur,
qui collatum hoc beneficium infirmis auferat.
§101. Ex Libro Censuali de Domesday 4.
(See p. 280.)
Pax regis manu vel sigillo data siquis infregerit. Ita ut hominem cui
pax ipsa data fuerit occidat : et membra et vita ejus in arbitrio regis
erunt si captus fuerit. Et si capi non potuerit ; ab omnibus exul ha-
bebitur et siquis eum occidere praevaluerit spolia ejus licenter habebit.
Siquis extraneus in oxeneford manere deligens et domum habens
sine parentibus ibi vitam finierit ; rex habebit quicquid reliquerit.
Siquis alicujus curiam vel domum violenter effregerit vel intraverit
ut hominem occidat, vel vulneret vel assaliat ; centum solidos regi emendat.
Similiter qui monitus ire in expeditionem non vadit; c. solidos regi dabit.
Siquis aliquem interfecerit intra curiam vel domum suam ; corpus ejus
et omnis substantia sunt in potestate regis praeter dotem uxoris ejus si
dotatam habuerit.
1 The name Codeslam is so written, but no doubt is an error of the copyist for
Codes I aw.
2 It has not been thought necessary to print the account of the land of the
Clerici, as it does not concern Oxford.
3 Printed in Chron. Mm. Ab., Rolls Series, vol. ii. p. 154.
4 Domesday Survey, folio 154 b, col. 2.
APPENDIX A. 347
§'102. Ex Willelmi Malmesbiriensis de Gestis Regum1. Lib. II.
§ 215-
(See p. 289.)
Mildritha in Taneto insula Cantiae, quam matri suae in solutionem necis;
fratrum suorum, Ethelredi et Egelbirthi, dederat rex Egbertus, coelibatur
dans operam, ibidem vitae metam incurrit. Sequenti tempore, ad coenobium.
sancti Augustini Cantuariam translata, eximia monachorum sedulitate
honoratur, pietatis fama et dulcedinis juxta vocabulum suum in cunctos
aeque praedicabilis. Et quamvis ibi pene omnes monasterii anfractus pleni
sint sanctorum corporibus, nee eorum parvi nominis aut meriti, sed quorum
singula per se possent illustrare Angliam, nullo tamen ilia colitur inferius
quin immo amatur et commemoratur dulcius.
§ 103. Ex Chron. Monasterii de Abingdon11.
(See p. 302.)
Wuillelmus, rex Anglorum, Petro de Oxeneford, salutem. Sciatis quod
volo et praecipio ut abbas Rainaldus de Abbendona, et monachi ecclesiae
suae, ita bene et honorifice et quiete habeant et teneant omnes consuetu-
dines suas ubique in omnibus rebus, sicut melius habuerunt tempore regis
Eadwardi, et tempore patris mei, et nullus homo iis inde amplius injuriam
faciat. Teste Rannulfo capellano.
Et fac abbati praedicto plenam rectitudinem de Eadwi, praeposito tuo,
et de aliis ministris tuis, qui monachis suis injuriam fecerunt.
1 Printed from the edition by the English Historical Society, 1840, vol. i. p. 369.
2 Printed in Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series, 1858, vol. ii. p. 41.
APPENDIX B.
The Name of Oxford.
It lias been thought well to add here a few words upon the supposed
origin of the name of Oxford, since it has not been found convenient to
discuss the question in the course of the previous pages.
There are two views, for each of which there is something to be said ;
and it is proposed here rather to set down the various considerations which
suggest themselves, in dealing with the question, than to press either view
unduly forward to the disparagement of the other. We do not know, nor
can we know how or when the name was applied ; all that can be done is
to arrange the evidence and weigh the probabilities.
It is a good rule in considering the derivation of the name of a place, to
begin by strictly observing the earliest form in which the name occurs, and
next the several variations which have been adopted by writers who im-
mediately succeed the one who first names the place, noting how far they
support, or tend to qualify, the earliest reading l. Afterwards analogies may
be brought to bear upon the question, and if the case demands it, further
considerations as to whether the earliest form met with may or may not
have been preceded by some other.
It has already been said that the earliest mention of Oxford is to be
found in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the year 912, and two of the
chronicles which give the name were actually written before the close of
the tenth century. The earliest form is Oxnaforda 2, and the other chronicles
follow the same reading when recording the same event, except a late
Chronicle F, which has Oxanaforda. Under the year 924, one Chronicle D
1 As an example of the opposite mode of procedure by which the merest guess-
work comes to be introduced into a work otherwise of real value, the explanation
of Shotover hill, near Oxford, as given in Isaac Taylor's recent work on Words and
Places may be adduced. First, it should be observed that in the Domesdav Survey,
at the end of the king's lands in Oxfordshire, a list of the 'Dominica Forest*
Regis ' is given, viz. those in Scotornc, Stauuorde, &c. Following the repeated
mention of these forests through the Close Rolls, Patent Rolls, and others, we
have the varieties ofScotore, Shotore, Shothore, Shotovre, Schotore, Shottovere,'&c.
throughout King John's and Henry Ill's reign, and so throughout documents of
various kinds into the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. (The introduction of the
n in Domesday, it may be remarked by the way, is probably due to an erroneous
reading by the scribe, as that letter does not appear again in any of the numerous
later instances observed.) Though there may be difference of opinion as to the
meaning of the two syllables Scot and ore or ovre (cf. Comcn-ore on the other side
of Oxford), nothing can justify the following :— ' As might have been expected,
French and Norman names in England have been peculiarly liable to suffer
Chateau vert in Oxfordshire has been converted into Shotover Hill.' Words and
Places, 2nd ed. 1865, p. 390 ; 3rd ed. revised, p. 267.
a See ante, p. 116, and Appendix A, § 35.
APPENDIX B. 349
has Oxanforda, the others all Oxnaforda. Under 1009, the form Oxenaforda
is adopted in three chronicles, Oxneforda in one, E, and Oxanaforda again
in F. Under 1013 it is the same, but E has gone back to Oxnaforda,
while F continues as before. Under 10 15 it is the same, but we get the
form of Oxonaforda in E, for the first time, D and F continuing as before.
Under 1018, G and E have Oxnaforda, D has Oxanaforda. Later on
Oxnaforda seems to become the rule \ Passing from the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicles to other sources we cannot be sure whether the copy of
Ethelred's Charter to S. Frideswide's in the Ch. Ch. Chartulary follows the
original, but there it is written Oxenford, and the same apparently in the
Oseney transcript, and in the C. C. C. copy, Oxeneford. The copies 'per
inspeximus ' are of little or no value as evidence in the matter of the exact
spelling of a place. The Domesday Survey, it will be observed, has
always Oxeneford.
The various readings on coins are also interesting ; we have Ox and
Oxna of Eadgar (959), Oxa, Oxna, and Oxne of Eadweard (975), Ona,
Ox, Oxn, Oxan, and Oxna of Aethelred (979), Ox, Oxcen, Oxe, Oxen,
Oxn, Oxsa, Oxsen, Oxsena, and Oxsn of Eadmund (1016). With Cnut's
name appear Ocx, Ocxe, Ocxen, Ocxene, Ox, Oxa, Oxsa, Oxse, Oxsn,
Oxsen, Oxsena, and one having O, which is ascribed to Oxford. To
Harold Harefoot (1035) are given Oc, Ocx, Ocxe, Oxan, and to Hartha-
cnut (1040) Ocxenf and Oxana. To Edward the Confessor (1042) have
been ascribed coins with the names of Ocx, Ocxa, Ocxe, Ocxen, Ox, Oxe,
Oxene, Oxenex, Oxne, Oxnef, and Oxni, while Harold's coins have Ox,
Oxenfo, and Oxenca2. Though coin nomenclature, on account of the
abbreviations being left as a rule to the individual moneyer who makes
the die, is not of any value as to the origin or meaning of a name, the
general consensus of these forms of the name are worthy of consideration,
and in this case they point very clearly to the fact that the word Ox was
understood to be an essential element in the first half of the name of
Oxford from the middle of the tenth century onwards. The suffix of
1 ford ' does not so clearly appear on the coins, but about that there is no
question at issue. One earlier type of coin with the inscription of Orsna
and forda will be noticed in the next Appendix.
The variations of the twelfth century chroniclers are based on the forms
of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and include Oxeneforda, Oxineford, and
Oxenforda, and in one case Oxeforda, as well as the same with the varied
terminations of fordia and ford.
The form Oxonia which superseded the others is not found till much
later3. Other forms might be quoted due to careless writing, bad reading,
1 No notice is taken of the termination which, though generally da, is sometimes
de, and in one or two cases dan, according to grammatical requirements.
2 These are taken from the lists supplied by Ruding in Annals of the Coinage
of Great Britain, 1840, pp. 1 31-145, to which have been added those from the
Stockholm collection, catalogued by Hildebrand (Anglosachsiska mynt i Svenska
Kongl. Myntkabinettet funna i Sveriges ford : Stockholm, 1846.)
3 There seems a tendency in the twelfth century to adopt the form Oxoneford,
and in all the rolls and legal documents it appears almost invariably in the con-
tracted form of Oxo)i . Sometimes Oxonia occurs, which seems to be merely an
350 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
or perhaps dependence on the sound ; and an instance of the last has been
already given from the Norman Life of Edward the Confessor, viz.
Axone-vorde l.
There can therefore be no question that the earliest form of the word,
whether regarding sound, or spelling, distinctly represents 'the ford of the
Oxen-.' Hence it might be thought that the question was settled. It
would be urged that at a particular spot oxen were frequently passing over
the river, and that the circumstance would naturally have given the name
to the spot, and the village or town which grew up adjoining the road
which led from the ford, would be called after the name of that ford.
Before, however, passing on to the other theory it must in fairness to it
be pointed out that, though a few cases in the boundaries attached to early
charters occur, in which the spot of ground is called from the Oxen, it is
not frequent. The following seem to be all that can be adduced : the
oxna-/W.>, the oxan-^rj 3, the oxna-/ra (or island), the oxena-fe/d, the
oxena-gehaeg (or paddock), the oxna-dune, the oxna-mere, the oxe-/acuf
evidently signifying certain portions of land set apart for oxen, or the pools
near them. Two other instances perhaps better illustrate the name of
Oxford, viz. an oxen-^v?^ and an oxene-bricg, because it is not easy to see
why a gate 4, or a bridge, or a ford, should be set apart for oxen only, so as
to give the name as would be the case of a field. None of the above land-
marks, however, seem to have left their name behind in the places to
which they belonged, with the exception of the Isle of Oxn-ey, which is
still so called on the southern confines of Kent, and the Oxena-gehaeg
which probably exists in Oxhey in Hertfordshire 5.
extension of the above contracted form. In one case, in a close roll of King John's
reign, the clerk has perhaps written it as the name was called out to him ' Hoxonia?
It may be useful to add that want of attention to the fact of the late form of
Oxonia stamps the introduction of the interpolated passage in Asser as a forgery,
for the name Oxonia, as will have been seen {ante, p. 46), is introduced several
times.
1 See ante, p. 182. A Frenchman may well have pronounced Oxenford after
that manner. The ways in which Waurin, a French chronicler of the close of the
fourteenth century, treats the name may be noted. He has imported into his work
much of Geoffrey of Monmouth's romance, and in following that he refers to
Bessonus, i.e. Boso, of Exincefort. Elsewhere Oxenfort, and in one case Xenfort.
In referring to a tournament held in his own time, he says it took place at
Asquesuffort, and this possibly may be meant for Oxford. The Chronicle is printed
in the Rolls Series, 1864-69. It may perhaps also be to the purpose to note
the following illustrations of spelling Oxford by foreigners from letters duly
received through the post by the author. Oxfort (frequent), Oxforth (also frequent),
Auxford, Anjord, and one from Madrid, and written very plainly Ordox. The
form Oxforthc is that given in the Promptorium Parvulum, a glossary compiled
circa 1440.
2 Oxa, an Ox, gen. sing. Oxan, genitive plural Oxcna. Contracted Oxna.
'J Ers, written also Yrse. but generally eise, explained by Kemble to signify
ground on which grass is allowed to grow after corn crops.
4 It is possibly used as applied to the pass over a hill ( = Fr. col), e.g. Corfes-
gate in Dorset.
5 The above list is taken from the index to Kemble's Codex Diplomaticus .
APPENDIX B. 351
The Domesday Survey does not supply many combinations with the
word Ox. Oxe-cumbe in Lincolnshire, an Oxen-done in Northants, and
another in Gloucestershire, an Oxene-clif'm Yorkshire, an Oxe-lei in Hants,
and another in Stafford, an Oxe-landa in Suffolk as well as an Ox-a (which
now has become Hox-ne), an Oxe-tune (or tone) in Yorkshire, Nottingham,
and Lincoln ; an Oxe-iviche in Hertford, an Oxen-burb (now Oxborough),
Norfolk, an Oxen-^j also in Norfolk, and an Oxi-bola in Shropshire com-
plete the list. In most of these cases there seems to be good reason to
suppose that their names were derived respectively from the combe, the
hill, the cliff, the meadow, the land, the island, the enclosure, and the wick
(or farm), appropriated especially to Oxen. For the last two on the list
no derivation can be satisfactorily assigned l.
Such reasonings, however, it must be borne in mind, are purely con-
jectural. All that is shown by the list is that there is good ground for
supposing that the word Ox entered sometimes into the nomenclature of
places. The medieval and modern names would add some few additions to
the above, but not many, while most of the Domesday names have survived
with but little change. No other Oxenford has been observed except a
small property in Wittley parish in Surrey. It seems that Richard de
Aquila, who died in 11 76, and who was lord of Wittley, gave the manor of
that name to the monks of Waverly 2. Situated some little distance from
the upper tributaries of the river Wey, there is reason to suppose that the
name must have been given it from a ford over one of the little burns
which supplied this district with water and which was used by oxen passing
to and fro, perhaps from their meadow in which they grazed to their
stalls in which they were sheltered. This reasoning however would
scarcely apply to the ford over so important a river as the Thames.
The other theory is that the name is a corruption of Ouse-ford or
Ousen-ford, or some similar form of the word, that is * the ford over the
river.' There is no doubt that the rivers in a large number of cases, and
the hills in some few cases, retained, at the time of the Saxon conquest, and
retain still their original Celtic names, though the British language generally
was stamped out on the advent of the Saxons in these parts in a very
remarkable degree. There are many objections which may be raised
against such an hypothesis as 'the river ford/ and as those objections
have mainly to be answered by analogies, it will be attempted, however
imperfectly, to supply some few examples which may perhaps tend to sup-
port the theory.
The first objection to the theory may be that it involves the combination
of a Celtic affix with an English suffix ; the answer is that this combination
is by no means rare, e.g. the Exe or the Axe has given rise to an Exminster
and an Axminster, and an Exmouth and an Axmouth in Devonshire, and
above all the Eaxan-ceaster of the Chronicles, and Exeter of our own day.
1 The edes may possibly be the edisc, a name which still survives for the aftermath
in some districts. Oxi-bola is spelt Oxi-bold in the Close Rolls.
2 See the brief account in Dugdale's Monasticon, vol. vi. p. 1624. The name
does not appear on the maps, nor has it been observed amongst the places named
in the public records.
352 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Besides these there is an Axbridge, and Exmoor, and Exford, in Somerset,
and an A.zford1 in Wiltshire, and these may perhaps be sufficient without
going into cases where the Celtic name of the river might be disputed: and
it must further be remembered that Axe and Exe arc dialectic forms of
the same word which includes Ouse.
It may be objected again that the form Ouse-ford would not be likely to
be changed into Oxna-ford or Oxena-ford, and to this it may be answered
first, that in all probability the foreign word would be adapted to the
English ford by some adjectival form, or still more likely by the use of the
genitive, and would probably have been Ous en-ford or Ousan-ford (just as
the Exe was made Eaxan-ceaster 2). And next that Ouse being a name
unknown and ' Oxena ' a name as well known as any word in the English
language, there would be the natural tendency for one to give way to the
other.
But there is a further consideration, namely, that the dialectic forms are
so numerous for the river's name, that it would be dangerous to determine
any definite sound for any one of them, at any particular spot, or even to
suppose that if the river divided one province from another, e. g. the
Belgae from the Dobuni, that the people on both sides would necessarily
call the river by the same name, or at least with the same pronunciation.
Names must have been handed down orally in Britain, since no trace of
British records, apart from the very rude inscriptions on coins, &c, have
been found to have existed ; and as long as it can be shown that the general
character of the word is such as might have been transformed into Oxena,
that is sufficient for the theory.
The westermost and perhaps truest Celtic form of water or river is Uisge,
which Ireland has retained in the spirit Uisge-baugh, i.e. fire-water or
whiskey 3, and Wales in Usk, i. e. the river on which Caerleon stands.
Amongst the Damnonii of Devon and Cornwall the name must have had
much the same sound ; for while in Wales, it has kept its softer sound of
Usk, the word was, either before or after the advent of the English, on the
south of the Bristol Channel, i.e. in Devon and Somerset, hardened into
Exe, and Axe, and the rivers retained those names throughout the middle
ages, and retain them still. As already mentioned, the towns also about
them retain the names of the rivers in their formation to the present
hour. Asser, at the close of the ninth century, in describing the ravages
of the Danes in the south, mentions that :—
1 This Axfonl may perhaps be ascribed to some other name, as it is a ford over
the river Kennet, which is a good Celtic name. Still, parts may have been called
the axe by the inhabitants.
- There seems to be great latitude in the formation of the words when joining
the affix to the suffix; e.g. it is sometimes Exan-ceaster, at others Exa-ceaster.
So again with the river Afn or Avon, we find Afene-mutha and Afena-mutha; but
Exan-mutha ; Tama-weorthige, as well as Taman-weorthe, for Tamworth ; Taem-
ese-forda, as well as Tem-es-an-forda, for Tempsford (see post, p. 360). The above
are readings taken from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
3 In Cobbett's Geographical Dictionary of England (1832) among the Yorkshire
rivers Wiske is given. No doubt meant for the Esk.
APPENDIX B. 353
'They thence went to Devonshire {Domnanid) to a place which
is called in the Saxon tongue Eaxan-ceastre, but in the British tongue
Cair-wijc; in Latin Civitas [Exx], which is situated on the eastern
bank of the river Wise V
Under the year 1050, one of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles has : —
* In the same year arrived in the Welsh Axe {Wylisca Axd) from
Ireland thirty-six ships, and thereabout did harm with the help of
Gryffith the Welsh King V
This must undoubtedly be the Usk 3, and the passage proves the identity
as to name between that and the Axe of Somerset and Devon.
It is not easy to show on what principle or at what time the soft sound
of Usk or Isc came into the harder sound of Exe and Axe, but it is certain
that it did so 4. We know that once the two had a similar sound, because
the Romans have left the names of Gaerleon and Exeter in the Antonine
Itinerary as Isca Silurum and Isca Dumnuniorum 5 respectively, proving that
1 Asser, ALlfredi Magni Vita, sub anno ; printed in Mon. Hist. Brit., p. 479.
The word Exce seems not to have been in the original MS. It is quite possible
that Asser left a blank not knowing the Latin name, or he might have intended
only to explain that Caer meant Civitas. Simeon of Durham, however, writing
early in the twelfth century, and possibly having had access to the original copy,
gives this passage thus : ' Ad Exancestriam diverterunt, quod Britannice dicitur
Cair-wisc, Latine Civitas Aquarnm. De Gestis Regum, sub anno 876' {Mon.
Hist. Brit. p. 681).
2 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle D, sub anno. In describing events of the previous
year the Chronicle E has occasion to refer to the sailors forcing Swegen into
their vessel and running it into Axmouth {to Axa-mU<$an), i. e. Exmouth in Devon-
shire ; hence it was necessary to distinguish the two Axe rivers.
3 Henry of Huntingdon, in giving the list of British cities attributed to Nennius
in referring to ' Kaer-legion,' writes, * Nunc autem vix moenia ejus comparent ubi
Usca (v. 1. Asca) cadit in Sabrinam* {Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 692).
* We find the two forms shown on the continent, e. g. the "leap of Ptolemy and
Strabo and Isara of mediaeval writers (mod. Isere, France ; also the Isar, a tributary
of the Danube) ; the Oesia.or Oisa, of the Antonine Itinerary (mod. Oise. France) :
on the other the Escamus and Oescus of Pliny and "Oaiaos of Thucydides (now
Ischa and Isker, tributaries of the Danube) ; and the Axona of Caesar (mod. Aisne,
a confluent of the Oise, France). By taking in names of places derived from the
rivers a long list might be made. It may be noticed as an example that the
Abbey of Essay in Normandy is written in the charters Axa, and Axiacum. The
word Ax, however, in some cases seems to be derived from the Latin Aquae, or
rather Aquis (e. g. Dax, Aix-la-Chapelle, Aix-les- bains, &c), and not from the
hardening of the Celtic word.
5 The Antonine Itinerary may be of any date between the early part of the
third century and the close of the fourth century. The Iter No. XII, which de-
scribes the journey from Winchester into Wales, gives Isca Dumnuniorum, and
then, after some three or four stations, gives Iscae Leg. II. Augusta (v. 1. Iscaeleia
Augusti, Iscalegi Augusti), which must be identified with Caer-leon on Usk. The
Iter No. XV. is practically a repetition of the above, ending with Isca Dum-
nuniorum. There can be little doubt this must be identified with Exeter.
Ptolemy in his geography {circa a. d. 120) seems to have confused the two, having
under ' the cities of the Durrmonii,' added after the name Isca words which belonged
to the other, as if the two cities were in one part of Britain. His list runs, "latca, —
A a
354 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
at the time when their arms reached these parts the names of the two
rivers had, as spoken by the inhabitants, the same sound. But the Isc
could only have been one of the dialectic forms amongst the Britons,
because we find both in the east of Britain and the north the form Ouse1.
The analogy then is something of this kind. It is clear that the soft Isc
or Uisc '2 was hardened into Exe and Axe, when the English named their
Exeter and Axminster, and therefore not improbable that the soft Ouse,
or some word with a sound between the Usk, on the west, and the Ouse
on the east3, may have been hardened for similar reasons into Ox when
they named their Oxford ; while in the latter case there would be the addi-
tional reason of the natural substitute of a known word, with a meaning
which was in accordance with its use, instead of an unknown one *.
It is difficult, perhaps, to determine whether the river-name had already
changed from a soft form to a harder form resembling more nearly Ox
before it was combined with ford, or whether, after it was combined with
ford, the Osan became by degrees Oxen ; and in bringing analogies to bear
we are met with historical difficulties5. Few names of places now remain
beginning with Ouse or Ose. We have beside Osen-ey Abbey, which will
be referred to later on, the well-known instance of the two Ouse-burns
in Yorkshire, which have retained their name, and Ouse-thorpe and Ouse-
Jleet in the same county, which probably derive their names from the river.
Atytccv Sevrepa aePaarrj. Ptolemy, it may be added, also gives as one of the cities
of the Dobuni, together with Venta (i. e. Winchester) and the Hot Springs (i. e.
Bath), "IaxaAis, which may perhaps be identified with Il-chester in Somerset, and
which thus seems also to contain the root word for river.
1 The name IVusa is given in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles under the year 905 to
the East Anglian Ouse. And the name Us a under the year 1010 to the same,
with special reference to the upper part near to Bedford. Both Florence of
Worcester and Simeon of Durham employ the term Usa for that river as well as
for the Yorkshire Ouse.
2 The discussion of the root form of the Celtic word for water would be beside
the purpose of these remarks, though Us or Use may be noted as common to both
Usk and Ouse, and in all probability the Isca of the Romans was a latinization of
Uisk rather than of Ise. Further, it is possible that Esk was intermediate between
Uisk or Isk, though it must be confessed that no trace of it can be produced in the
south of Britain. The numerous cases in which /Esc appears in the southern
districts are all more readily traceable to the Teutonic for the mountain-ash tree.
3 The name of Ock for the river will be considered later on. See p. 363.
4 ' Teutonic nations inhabiting a county with Celtic names have unconsciously
endeavoured to twist those names into a form in which they would be susceptible
of explanation from Teutonic sources. The instances are innumerable.' Isaac
Taylor's Words and Places, second ed., 1865, p. 466 ; third ed. revised, p. 265.
5 The classical writers do not help us much. Besides the river Isca, Ptolemy
gives Ou£eAa as a town of the Dumnonii, and just before Tamare and Isca; while
the geographer of Ravenna gives Uxcla and an Uxclis. Possibly the former is
represented by Exeter, and Lostwithiel, on the Fowey, in Cornwall, occupies the
site of the latter, but it seems to show a hardening of the sound of the river
word before the advent of the Saxon. Further, the latter geographer has given
Axium in his list of rivers, but as he did not compile his geography till the
middle of the seventh century, he may have had opportunities of hearing of a later
nomenclature. At the same time he keeps Isca, intending it for a different river.
APPENDIX B. 355
The names of Ous-den, Suffolk ; Ous-ton, Durham and Leicester and
Northumberland ; and Ous-by, Cumberland, may have nothing to do with
the river at all.
In Domesday we find only one or two names which have the prefix Ousy
namely an Ous-torp in Yorkshire, and another in Lincolnshire, an Ouste-
wic (now spelt Owst-wick), and an Oustre-feld in Yorkshire (which does
not appear to have survived) ; also an Ouse-ton in Bedfordshire, but this
is elsewhere in Domesday spelt Houstone, and is now Houghton Con-
quest. It is doubtful therefore if any of these throw light on the survival
of the river-name Ouse ; but while possibly under other forms the name
has survived, the consideration of the cases would only lead for the most
part into a field of guesswork 1.
When, however, we go back to documents before the Conquest, here
and there traces are found of the Ouse, e.g. in Osan-ige and Osan-lea. To
weigh the bearing of the former of these some historical considerations are
necessary to be taken into account, because at first sight it appears to give
certain evidence of the change of Osan-ige into Oxn-ey, and would therefore
distinctly support the change of Osanford into Oxanford.
A copy of the will of iElfric, Archbishop of Canterbury (ob. 1005) is
preserved in the Abingdon series, and judging from internal evidence the
Abingdon chronicler has transcribed the original accurately, and he has
added to it a Latin translation. By his will the Archbishop bequeaths
certain lands to Abingdon but more to S. Alban's, and amongst the latter
he gives land at Great Tew (apud Tiuuan) and Osan-ig, with land in London
which he had purchased 2. According to the Gesta Abbatum Monasterii S.
Albani, the early portion of which is supposed to have been compiled by
Matthew Paris himself, a record is introduced of a certain abbot iElfric,
who is made to succeed Leofric his brother, who died in 1006. Here, how-
ever, there is abundant reason to suppose that Matthew Paris has confused
the order of the two brothers, and that when the S. Alban's chronicler
narrates the good deeds of Abbot iElfric, he is practically relating what
Archbishop iElfric had done for the abbey, and amongst them he says that
he purchased from the king for a thousand marks Oxon-age and Eadulfin-
tona, which had been put in pledge 3. Here we have mention of land which
1 In the Domesday of Kent there is an Os-pringes, which name still survives near
to Faversham. And in that of Yorkshire there is an Os-princ, which is now called
Ox-pring (near the source of the Don). This apparently provides an instance of
the change of the Os into Ox.
2 Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series, i. p. 418.
3 Gesta Abbattan Monasterii S. Albani, Rolls Series, 1867, vol. i. p. 33. See
also the note by Mr. Riley, p. 30, in which he shows that this iElfric was the tenth
abbot and was made archbishop, and that Leofric his brother was the eleventh.
Further it may be remarked that the bequests of the will and the benefactions
recorded agree in other particulars; e.g. as regards Eadulfinton, the following
appears in the will, in the Latin translation : l Et hoc apud ipsum suum dominum
erat interveniens ut concederet loco Sancti Albani terram apud Cingesbiri et ipse in
commutatione reciperet Eadulfingham.' Further than this, the S. Alban Chronicles
refer to the gifts, both of Tew and Kingsbury. Other points show that the lands
referred to in the different documents are identical.
Aa 2
356 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
in the tenth century, as shown by the original will of the Archbishop of
Canterbury, had still the name of Osan-ige\ when, however, the thirteenth
century chronicler puts together his notes he spells the name Oxon-age.
But later still, and throughout the S. Alban's Registers, it is spelt Ox-ey ',
and on the Ordnance map Ox-bey \
But concurrently with this we find in a volume of thirteenth century
transcripts of documents relating to S. Alban, that of a charter of Ethel-
red, dated 1007 3, mentioning certain lands then granted or confirmed
by the King, and amongst them Oxan-gebage, and from the general con-
tents of the charter there is no reason to doubt that it refers to the same
land mentioned in the will of Archbishop iElfric. So that we are met
apparently by the difiiculty of two different names for the ground at the
same time, supposing of course that the transcribers have each followed the
original copy. For it is not simply a change of a few letters. The Osun-
ige of the will is the ' Ouse island.' The Oxan-gehoege of the charter is the
* Ox-paddock.' The form ending in ige or ey or island is followed through
all the medieval documents, as Ox-ey seems to be the name by which their
manor was known to the monks at S. Alban's. The Ox-bey of the map,
however, seems to reflect the bcrge of the charter.
The argument, therefore, rests upon the priority of the name in the
will of Archbishop iElfric, and on the assumption of it being rightly copied.
It is another question whether the name was derived from the name Ouse
having been once applied to the stream which now bears the name of Colne,
and which is the next important tributary to the Thames, after the Thame
on its northern bank : but it may be added that on this same Colne Ux-
bridge is situated, the origin of which is open to question, since no early
documents have been observed in which the name occurs.
On the whole, then, while it cannot be proved that Osan-ige was the
only name of the place in the tenth and eleventh century, it does appear the
place had that name. How far Oxan-gehag was a contemporary name, or
how far it is possibly due to the gradual change going forward from the
1 Ouse island 'to 'Ox paddock,' there are not sufficient data on which to
arrive at a definite conclusion : but in either case we have a precedent for
an interchange of Ouse and Ox.
With respect to Osan-lea 4, though the charter which grants the land to
Abingdon Abbey in the year 984 has the boundaries of the land attached,
1 In one place in the Register (p. 476), under Abbot Rogers' additions to the
monastery 1 260-90, it is spelt Ok-ey, i. e. ' villis de Crokeley, Okey, et Mykelfield.'
- The identification of the district to the south of Watford and on the left bank of
the river Colne, which is marked in the Ordnance Survey in one or two places Oxhey,
is not certain, but no trace of any other is found. It would appear to have been
broken up into more than one manor. In Abbot Rogers' time (1260-90) we find
Oxey Walrand, and in Abbot Thomas' time (1349-96) we find Oxey Richard.
3 This will be found printed in Kemble's C. D. vol. vi. No. 1304, p. 158.
4 It consists of a piece of land of two hydes, 'ubi valgus relatio dicitur aet
Osan-lea,' given to Abingdon in 984 (C/iron. Mon. Ab., i. p 393). It may perhaps
best be referred to one of the two manors of Ose-lei mentioned in the Domesday
Survey, fol. 51 a, col. 1, in Hampshire. The Yorkshire Domesday has an Ose-h
(fol. 316 a, col. 2), but this is less probable. The modern names of neither of these
have been identified.
APPENDIX B. 357
it has been found impossible to identify it satisfactorily. The abbey does
not seem to have retained it long or it would have appeared again in their
records, but no trace of any sale or exchange, or even the slightest reference
to it, is found beyond this single document, so that any argument to be
derived from it would be valueless. Still, it exists as an early example of
the name Ouse being retained to that date.
These solitary instances rather go to show how much the name Ouse
had been superseded in all compounds in which the name entered. There
are, moreover, only two charters in which the Use appears named as the
river bounding the properties granted ; unfortunately they do not admit of
the site of the land referred to being with certainty identified1.
Next it may be objected that there is no evidence that the river at
Oxford ever bore the name of Ouse ; and further that this river from its
first appearance in history has borne the name of Thames. To meet these
objections it will be necessary to enter into one or two considerations
which may at first sight appear to be somewhat of a digression ; but it
must be borne in mind that the nature of the discussion is a peculiar one,
inasmuch as we are considering historical facts, relating to the district at a
date before we have any historical records of that district ; hence the case
must inevitably rest upon the evidence which can be obtained by, as it
were, reflected light — reflected, that is, from events and circumstances
belonging to a much later period.
The objection arising from the known name of the river being the Thames,
and therefore that the name Ouse is excluded, is met at once by the con-
sideration that the name Thames or Tem-ese is composed of two words,
the latter, as has been noticed, being a dialectic form of the river-names
amongst which also the Ouse is included. The form in which the name
Thames first comes before us does not militate against this view. In the
two places2 where it is mentioned by Caesar, in his Commentaries, written
B. c. 55, it is always spelt in the MSS. as Tam-esis. In the annals of
Tacitus 3, written circa a. d. 80, it is written Tam-esa. In the Geography
of Ptolemy (c. A. d. 120) several rivers are given, but unfortunately the
arrangement he has followed involves his omission of the Thames, though
1 In the grant of King iEthelred to a certain Elf here in 979 of land at Ollan-ege,
it would perhaps appear that Olney in Bucks must be meant, since it lies on the
banks of the Ouse. Amongst the boundaries occur ' Andlang broces inon Use ;
andlang Use on Wilinford ; of tham forde andlang Use to Kekan were ; of Kekan
were andlang Use on Caluwan wer' (Kemble's Codex Diplomatics, vol. Hi. No. 621).
But no traces of these names now exist. In the case of Niwantun, there are so
many Newingtons it is impossible to say whether there is a river near the place
still bearing the name or whether the word is meant for a river at all. The
boundaries run, * And than to Use staethe on Ealferthes hlaew ' (Kemble, C. D.,
vol. v. No. 1 1 14). The form Usan-mere and Us-mere are also found, which
probably refer to the river.
2 Caesar de Bello Gallico. 'Cujus fines a maritimis civitatibus flumen dividit
quod adpellatur Tamesis ' (Lib. v. § 11). 'Caesar cognito consilio eorum ad
flumen Tamesin in fines Cassivellauni exercitum duxit ' (ibid. § 18).
3 Tacili Annates , ' Visamque speciem in aestuario Tamesae subversae coloniae '
(Lib. xiv. cap. 32).
$5$ THE EARLY HISTORY OE OXFORD.
he names amongst those on the southern shore of Britain both the Tamar
and the Isc or Exe1.
In the third century we have Dion Cassius copying Tacitus and spelling
the word Tam-esa. But few other classical writers name the Thames2, and
with these, as well as with our own early writers, we find much the same
spelling adopted. We cannot trust, perhaps, the MS. copies of Gildas and
Nennius. each of whom once mention the Thames; the best MSS., how-
ever, give respectively Tham-esis and Tam-isia. In Beda we have in one
passage Tam-esis, but in all others the adjectival form of Tamensis
fluvius. Probably, however, the earliest and the first actual English form
is that given by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the account of Caesar's
invasion, where it is spelt Taem-ese. Two of the later copies make this
Temese, and throughout the rest of the earliest copy of the Chronicle,
and in most of the others wherever the word occurs (and it occurs about
twenty times), it is written Tem-ese. In this it would appear that the two
component parts of the word as understood by the people of the country
are clearly set forth, i. e. Tern and ese.
If we turn to the Charters we find the more common form of the Tem-ese
sometimes Tam-ese, rarely Tern-is, and its Latin representative Tam-isia.
The medieval historians adopt mainly Tamesis, and very frequently the
adjectival form of Tamensis.
The first word of the compound, namely Tarn, is found preserved in
other rivers throughout the country, i. e. the Tamar 3, the Teme, the
Thame, &c, and they have left their names in towns such as Tamborn
and Tamwovth in Staffordshire, a Tamworth in Warwickshire, and a
Tamerton both in Devonshire and in Cornwall. There has been some
discussion about the meaning of the word, but probably ' wide spreading '
is the simplest as well as the most accurate interpretation, the name being
derived from the large expanse of meadow land which is laid under water
in flood time, when the river overflows its banks.
The suffix of ese, however, is the most important. Neither ese nor ise are
known to exist as distinct names of rivers in this country, but, as already
pointed out, they must belong to the same class as the Uisk and the Ouse,
and if we go across the Channel we find the Oise, which gives its name to
two Departments, and which must be a member of the same family. Further,
the Isca of the Antonine Itinerary and the "laaKa of Ptolemy, as already
pointed out, prove the existence of a form approaching Ise.
The direct evidence now for the Thames at Oxford having been called
the Ouse lies in the circumstance that one of the islands, which may well
have received its name as early as Oxford itself, became, in the year 1129,
1 Claudii Ptolomaei Gcographia, Lib. ii. cap. 3. Tapapov ttot. tit&oXav. —
'iffCLKO. TTOT. €K@0\CLV.
8 Paulus Orosius, writing in 417 of Caesar's invasion, according to the MSS.,
has Thamesis as the name of a river, but] the anonymous Geographer of Ravenna,
who wrote circa 650, puts Tamese amongst his list of cities next after London.
3 The Tamar is found noted as a river by Ptolemy (see above, note 1). He
also amongst the cities of the Dumnonia gives the names Ta/iaprj and "l<r«o. The
anonymous Geographer of Ravenna {circa a. D. 640) gives amongst cities Tamaris.
Possibly Tamer-ton occupies the site.
APPENDIX B. 359
the site of an important monastery, and that form of the name was at once
stereotyped, so to speak, in the Abbey of Osan-eia, that is the island of the
Ouse1, so that the form has been retained to the present day, without
having been corrupted into any other. The variations of the name itself
amongst the charters and chronicles are very limited, seldom departing
from Osan or Osen for the affix, and when written in full either ea or eia or
eye2, for the suffix. This is not only shown throughout the large number
of charters which are found in the cartulary of the abbey itself, but from
the frequent reference to Oseney in other cartularies, as well as from the
entries in Rolls of various kinds. One exception has been observed, namely
in a single charter in the Bodleian Collection 3, in which the ' Abbot of
Oxen-ea ' is named ; the charter is not dated, but internal evidence shows
it to be about the middle of the thirteenth century 4. No other charter in
the same collection (and there are several with Oseney mentioned in one way
or another) has this form, nor has it been observed in others ; so that a
late solitary exception amongst perhaps a thousand instances, dating from
the early part of the twelfth century onwards, must be attributed to the
error of the scribe rather than any chance survival of an earlier form of the
name. That it might represent what the scribe had heard the place some-
times called in his time is possible, but then this would rather point to
that tendency, already described, of the substitution of a known name for
an unknown ; in other words the occasional corruption of Ousen-eye into
Oxen-eye would rather illustrate the growth of Ox-ford from Ousen-ford.
That it has even been called Oxeny in modern times would have been
doubted, were it not that on the Ordnance map of 1830 Oxny Mill appeared5.
The evidence taken as a whole, therefore, points to the fact that an l eye'
or island in the river at this point bore the name of Ousen-eye from the
earliest time when it comes into history ; and as it is contrary to the order
of the corruption of names that a known English word should be cor-
rupted into an unknown of the same length, it must be assumed that
the name Ousen-eye was given at the time when and for the sole reason
because the river there was called the Ouse.
Another singular piece of evidence may here be adduced which seems to
show the connection or rather the identity of the Ese and the Ouse, that is
to say, the same river may have been called sometimes one, sometimes the
other. There is an important river now bearing the name of Ouse, which
1 Isaac Taylor, however, in Words and Places, finds in the n in Ose-n-ey not
the Saxon genitive, but ' probably a relic of the Celtic innis or island ' (ed. 1865,
p. 204).
2 In one case, in a Close Roll of King John's reign (anno 15, memb. 9), the form
Osen-heye has been observed.
3 For this important example the writer is indebted to E. B. Nicholson, M.A.,
Bodley's Librarian.
4 The charter runs, 'Sciant omnes gentes quod ego Aeliz Ghernio quondam
uxor Henrici de Tomelee defuncto dedi, etc. ij solidos redditus quos abbas
Oxenee reddit ibi annuatim.' No. 439, Original Charters, Oxfordshire : described
in Turner's Bodleian Charters, 1878, p. 372.
5 In later editions of the map, since the railways were inserted, it appears to
have been omitted. In the 25-inch scale map it is spelt Osney.
360 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
rises near the southern borders of Northamptonshire. It flows past
Buckingham, Stony-Stratford (where the Watling Street crosses the
stream), and Olney ; but before it reaches Bedford it is joined by a tributary
called the Ousel, which rises at the northern extremity of the Chiltern
Hills, near to Dunstable1. The main stream, after passing Bedford, flows
by a town named Tempsford2, and then passes Huntingdon and St. Ives,
soon after which it receives the waters of the Cam, and then passes Ely,
and draining the great fen country of Cambridgeshire and Norfolk flows
into the Wasli. In this part of England it must have appeared as important
as the Tam-ese itself. It is therefore at first sight a very singular fact that
a river which must have once borne the name of Ouse, and bears it
still, should ever have borne at any time, with any settlers, the name of the
Tam-ese. And yet it was so, for at the place where the river was forded a
town grew up which bore the name of Tam-esanTord, i.e. the ford of
the Tam-ese.
Under the year 921, in describing the ravages of the Danish army about
B^rnwood and Aylesbury, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle narrates: —
'At the same time the army from Huntingdon and from the East
Angles, went and wrought the work at Tcem-ese-ford, and inhabited it,
and built, and forsook the other at Huntingdon V
Nearly a century later on — that is, under the year 1010 — and in describing
the ravages of the Danish army belonging to that period of their invasion,
the same Chronicle has the following : —
' And Tbeod-ford (Thetford) they burned and Granta-bricge (Cam-
bridge), and afterwards went again southwards to the Tem-ese ; and
the horsed-men rode towards the ships, and then again quickly turned
westward to Oxena-ford- scire, and thence to Buccinga-ham-scire, and
so ' andlang Usan ' (along the Ouse), till they came to Bede-forda and
so forth as far as lem-esan-ford, and ever burned as they went V
The two passages are given in full in order to show that there can be no
doubt whatever as to the place meant, and as we have the chronicles written
nearly a hundred years apart, there is no reason to suppose that it is a
chance spelling.
1 The Ousel is also crossed by the Watling Street at Fenny Strat-ford, to be dis-
tinguished from the ford over the main stream of the Ouse at Stony Strat-ford.
2 At Tempsford the Ouse is joined by the Ivel, which rises just within the
border of Bedfordshire due south of Tempsford ; and this seems to have something
of the Celtic form remaining (cf. Wivels-field, Sussex ; Wivil-is-combe, Somerset ;
and Wivels-ford on the Avon in Wiltshire). The Ivil (on which the chief place is
now called Biggleswade — Bicheles-wade in Domesday) is joined a little higher up
by a considerable stream, called on the map the Wiz, on which lies Ickle-ford.
Hitchin is spelt Hiz in Domesday, and gives its name to the Hundred.
8 from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle A, sub anno 921.
4 From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle C, sub anno 1010 (Chronicles A and B, as
already pointed out, have practically ceased). Chronicle D follows very closely,
also Chronicle E. The passage is wanting in F. The various readings are but few.
Theotford D, Grantabrycge E, Oxenafordascire D, Oxnafordscire E, Bucingham-
scire E, Bedanforda, D, E.
APPENDIX B. 361
Nor does this passage stand alone, for we trace the gradual change. The
place is four times mentioned in the Domesday Survey, and each time
Tam-ise-forde \ and when we turn to the Chartulary of St. Neot's we find
a charter as late as 1129 containing the name Tam-ise-ford2, and when we
turn to the Valor Ecclesiasticus of Henry VIII we find the property
entered as Tem-ys-ford 3. In these three cases we find the name spelt
precisely as the River Thames may be found spelt at the respective ages ;
that is, the Ouse was called the Thames. It would appear, therefore, that
Ouse and Ese were alternative names for the same river, and the affix Tarn
sometimes used, and sometimes omitted ; probably omitted by the people
of the county who knew only of their own Ouse, but with the affix by
strangers who had knowledge of other rivers called by the name of Ouse
or Ese.
But there is another singular circumstance which still further shows the
uncertainty of river nomenclature. It has been mentioned that while one of
the chief branches of the Ouse rises near to Banbury, the other rises near
to Dunstable, and bears the name, for the sake of distinction, of Ousel. In
the same district as the latter, and apparently with the tributaries of the
one interspersed amidst the tributaries of the other, as shown on the
map, rises another river 4, which with considerable windings flows south-
ward into the Thames, and which bears the name of, and has given its
name to the town of, Thame5. Thus we have an instance of one river
bearing the name of the affix by itself, while the other bears the name of the
suffix by itself. The Thame flows southward, and joins the Tham-ese, the
same name which the northern stream, i. e. the Ouse, bore previously in the
tenth and eleventh centuries. Names of course being given for distinction
their varieties must be attributed to that cause ; but how the Northfolk
and Southfolk, and West Saxons and East Saxons came to any agreement
as to distinctive names for the rivers which passed through rather than
bounded 6 their several provinces it is of course impossible to determine.
1 Domesday, folio 210 a, col. 2 ; 212 a, col. 2 ; 216 a, col. 2 ; 218 b, col. 1.
2 Printed in Dugdale's Monasticon, vol. iii. p. 473. ' Millesimo c°. xxix. ab
incarnatione Domini anno XVII Kal. Maii . . . Rob. de Carun . . . dedit Deo et
Sanctae Mariae Becc. et Sancto Neoto . . . unam insulam in manerio suo de Tamise-
ford. 3 Ibid. p. 481.
* The easternmost stream, and that which rises nearest the source of the Ouse,
bears on the map the name of ' Thistle ' brook, which appears very suggestive
of a corruption of 'The Ousel brook.' Indeed it is quite possible, bearing in
mind the connection between the Ouse, Ese, or Ise, that the original name mio-ht
have been ' The Issel ' brook. This is perhaps the chief of the two sources of
the Thame.
5 The river Thame is mentioned in the boundaries of the land belonging to
Wynchendon, which was given or confirmed to S. Frideswide by King ^Ethelred
in 1004 (see ante, p. 143), ' into Tame-streme ; andlang Tame-streme . . .'&c.
There is also mention of the Tamu villa in charters in the Chertsey Cartulary ;
and though they may be spurious as regards the grant, yet so far as the names are
concerned they are valuable. (KemBle, C. D. vol. v. 988.)
6 The Little Ouse which joins the great Ouse a little below Ely, it should be
added, forms the boundary for a considerable distance between Norfolk and Suffolk,
362 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
The argument to be derived from these considerations is that a part of
the river bearing now the name of Ousef having originally borne the name
of Tam-esc, both being Celtic names of the same family, there is nothing
a priori improbable that the Tam-ese in places once bore the name of
Ouse. In the one case, Tam-esan-ford or Tempsford on the Ouse points to
the old name, in the other Ousen-eye or Osncy, on the Thames, may
reasonably point to the old name also.
The fact of the Thames being composed of the two Celtic words Thorn
and cse, and that the latter was a word applied especially to the upper part
of the Thames proper, has been more or less frequently laid stress upon
by older writers. The theory that the word Isis was a fanciful name given
by Camden to the upper part of the river will not hold good. He probably
gave currency to the name, but the view had been put forward as early as
the fourteenth century by the anonymous author of the Eulogium Histu-
riarum.
1 Tamo-isa is a river dividing the eastern part of England, and flows
by London, and falls into the North Sea ; but it takes its rise from a
little spring near Cirencester, and is there called ho ; then flowing
as far as the town (? incum) which is called Tame, there the name is
composed of two streams, and is called Tam-ise from the compound V
Elsewhere the same writer says : —
' Thomisia seems to be composed of two rivers which are Thama and
Isa ; but Thorn runs by Dorcestria and there falls into ' Tsia,' whence
the whole of the river from its source as far as the sea is called Tamys.
For it rises from a certain little spring by Tettebury near Circestria2.
Leland perhaps follows this when he writes : —
'Tame and he metith aboute half a Mile beneth Dorchestre Bridg in
the Medowis V
Leland also frequently speaks of the Isis as the name of the upper
Thames, e. g. : —
1 A litle a this side the Bridge over the he at Abbingdon is a
Confluence of 2 Armes that brekith aboute the Est Ende of Abbingdon-
Abbay out of the hole streame of the he, and make 2 litle Isles or
Mediamnes.
the Waveney forming the remainder. Another stream which runs parallel to the
little Ouse and falls into the great Ouse just before it reaches Downham Market,
is named in the map ' The Wissey.' This seems again to be a dialectic form
connected with the Ise or Wise.
1 Printed from the Eulogium Historiarum, Rolls Series, i860, vol. ii. p. 8. The
author seems to have been writing this part of his work between 1360 and 1366.
2 Ibid. p. 147.
3 Lelandi Itinerary, Hearne's edition, 1745, vol. ii. pp. 12-24. See also ante,
p. 15, note 1. Also frequently in the Cygnca Cantio, e.g.
' Mox cerno Hydropolim [Dorchester] sacram, Birino
Quondam praesule, confluentiamque
Tamae ac Isidis : insuper vetusti
Castri culmina lapsa Sinnoduni.'
APPENDIX B. $6$
i The greath Bridge at Abbingdon over he hath a 14 Arches.
c A very litle beneth S. Helenes cummith Och Ryver thorough the
Vale of Whit-Horse into Isis.
* Ther cummith a litle bek by Pulton, that after goit at 2 Mille a litle
above into the his.
1 Then cummith Jmney-Broke into his.
1 The Hed of his in Cotesivalde risith about a Mile a this side
Tetbyri:
Camden also treats the matter in a poetical strain as follows : —
* Below this the Tame and Isis uniting do as it were join hands in
wedlock, and with their streams unite their names ; and as the Jor and
Dan in the holy land, and the Dor and Dan in France form the
Jordan and Dordan ; so these rivers go by the compound name of
Thamisis.'
In later editions a poem attributed to Bishop Gibson is printed1. But
while the theory that the junction of the Isis or Ouse and Thame made
Tamisis is fanciful, and has nothing to support it, it contains, as has been
pointed out, a truth that the two names are combined in the one river.
Though the whole river in all historical documents has borne the name of
the Tam-ese and never that of the Ouse or Ise, enough has probably been
adduced to show that a part of the river probably once bore the name of
Ouse ; possibly of Ese or Ise 2. It is doubtful too if the name Isis was
locally given to this part of the river till the sixteenth century, and then
in consequence of the etymological notes of the author of the Eulogium
or of Leland or of Camden, coupled perhaps with the poetical effusions
which they called forth 3 ; but for all that it was only the bringing to light
a hidden truth.
One other form of a river-name still exists in the neighbourhood, which
may perhaps bear upon the discussion, and that is ' the Ock.' Its whole
course is shown in the map which accompanies this volume, and we have, in
consequence of the existence of the Abingdon Cartulary, several copies of
charters which give the name as it was written in this century In
charters of this century we find the stream frequently mentioned amongst
the boundaries of those manors which border the Ock. In those of
Scaringford {Shilling ford) we find 'eft on Eoccen'; of Gosige (Goosey)
1 andlang Eoccen ' : of Linford (Lyford) ' betweox Eccene and Cilia rithe ' ;
of Cyngestun (Kingston Bagpuize) ' JErest of Eoccene ' : of Fifhide (Fyfield)
'iErest of Eoccan': of Garanford (Garford) 'anlang Eoccen"1.1 Close to
Abingdon itself the Abbey property was naturally very extensive,
and we find amongst the boundaries ' eft ut on Temese ; thaet up be
1 Printed in Camden's Britannia, London, 1789, vol. i. p. 291.
2 There is however an Eis-ey still existing in Gloucestershire, a mile to the north-
east of Cricklade, which may be so called from this part of the Thames where the
*ey' is formed, having borne a name the sound of which was expressed by eis.
3 The idea of the marriage of the Thame and the Isis has been a frequent subject
with poets, e. g. Spenser, Pope, Drayton, &c.
* Chron. Mon. Ab. vol. i. pp. 65, 15, 107, 350, 324, 95.
364 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
strcame on Occenes grestundic ; thaet a be die on Eccen\ thact ther up eft
on Ecccnforda V
Here is careless writing, but there can be no question that the proper
way of spelling the name was Eocce. As the Chronicle proceeds, medieval
additions of the twelfth and thirteenth century are made, so that we find
various spellings. The mill near to Abingdon (which still exists and is
called the Ockmill) we find referred to as ' Molendinum contiguum ponti
fluminis Eocbe'; elsewhere 'Molendinum de Okie.* While in their accounts
we find 'Molendinum de Occha' and 'super Eocba.% In the narrative in the
De Abbatibus of what Abbot Athelwold did, we read that he made a
'ductum sub dormitorio usque ad aquam quae dicitur Hokke2.' From
these entries we obtain tolerably sure evidence as to how the name was
pronounced.
Whether or not the word Eoc is an early dialectic form of the general
river-name is open to discussion. No evidence from the Roman names
left to us has been observed which implies that in Celtic times this varia-
tion had taken place; and perhaps taking all into account the form in
which it is found may, with more probability, be referred to the sound
which the followers of Cerdic and Cynric gave to the word. This
affluent, it will be observed by the map, flows for a short distance parallel
with the main stream, so much so that there were one or two manors
in the tenth century, bounded on the north by one, and the south by the
other. If the theory of the dialectic form of Ock be admitted, it directly
points to some common form from which the two names Osen-ey and Eoccen-
ford have resulted. The hardening of Osen-eye would have produced natu-
rally Occen-ey, and so the ford might have been called Occen-ford; and
though we have no direct evidence of this, in consequence of the Osen-
eye having retained its original soft sound, and the ford near it having
obtained the more intelligible form of Oxenford, still by the tributary
acquiring the name some light seems to be thrown upon the changes which
had taken place before the eleventh century in the names of the rivers of
the district 3.
It has not been thought necessary to discuss further the name of Rhyd-
ychen, since there is little doubt it owes its origin to the ingenuity of
Geoffrey of Monmouth (see ante, pp. 18-19). At the same time it has
come to be accepted very generally as a real name 4.
Viewing then the whole by the reflected light which existing river-
1 Chron. A/on. Ab. vol. i. p. 126. Elsewhere in the cartulary, when these
boundaries arc given, the names are written Eoccenes and Eoccen. Ibid. i. p. 176.
2 Chron. A/on. Ab., vol. ii. pp. io, 291, 306, 322, and 278.
3 The form Ock was not however confined to the south of the Thames. Amongst
the boundaries of S. Frideswide attached to King Ethelred's charter of 1004 occurs
the following: ' From the acre to the Ock mere, from that mere to Zeftele (Iffley) ;
from Iflley to the brook, from the brook to the Cherwell.'
4 To take the latest work of any credit 011 names of places, we find :— ' Cam-
bor//um, the ancient name of Cambridge, gives us the Celtic root rhyd, a ford,
which we find also in Rhedecina% the British name of Oxford.' Isaac Taylor's
Words and Places, 2nd ed. p. 254.
APPENDIX B. 365
nomenclature throws upon the ancient river-nomenclature where it has
been lost, we seem to obtain very strong evidence for the probability
of the name of Ouse or some cognate form of the river-word having
been applied at one time to the Thames as it flows past Oxford.
That a ford over that river should be called from the river, is more
likely to have been the case than from certain cattle which may have
crossed the river. It has been shown that the Thames itself has one of the
dialectic forms of Ouse within it, and it has been shown also that these
forms seem to have been used indifferently. The addition of the prefix
Tarn also, both by its being retained now by itself without a suffix for one
stream, while it has been lost in another not far off in which it was once an
essential part, seems to prove that the use of the prefix was arbitrary.
And lastly, the Osen eye, close by the ford, has retained its softer sound,
while a tributary stream has acquired a hard sound very similar to that
which was acquired in Oxford.
It must be admitted that all this amounts only to circumstantial evidence;
but then, it is a case in which only circumstantial evidence can be obtained.
What has been attempted here is to put that evidence before the reader.
Though it may perhaps appear that a disproportionate number of pages has
been given to the second theory as compared with those given in the first,
the quantity must not be allowed to weigh in favour of the second nor yet
the reverse. The easy and so more concise statement of the evidence in
favour of the first theory is due to the nature of the case ; we are then
treading on historical ground : the difficulties which apparently have to be
met as regards the second, and the necessity of occupying a considerable
space with illustration, are due to the fact that we are treading ground
comparatively prehistoric ; but the difference of treatment ought to have
no weight in the conclusion.
APPENDIX C.
On the Coins supposed to have been struck at Oxford during
King jElfred's reign.
Some stress has been laid in the argument for the early importance
of Oxford on the fact that it had a mint in JElfred's reign. For instance,
Dr. Ingram, under his account of New Inn Hall, has the following : —
1 The mint in this city is of very high antiquity. It can even boast
of a specimen, remaining to this day, of money struck here by King
Alfred V
And there seems to be a notion prevalent that, since certain coins which
are supposed to have been struck in Oxford have the name of Alfred
upon them, therefore King Alfred had a residence here. The argument,
however, to be derived from the existence of this coin, with the name
of the moneyer, and supposed to be struck at Oxford, is stated with more
historical precision by the late Mr. Green in his Conquest of England.
1 Coinage in the old world was the unquestioned test of kingship,
and a mint which Alfred set up at Oxford within the borders of the
Mercian Ealdormanry proves even more than the submissive words of
Witan or Ealdorman the reality of his rule. In fact, Wessex and
Mercia were now united, as Wessex and Kent had long been united
by their allegiance to the same ruler V
Whether regarded, then, as sustaining the theory of Alfred's direct
connection with the city of Oxford, or implying a more definite rule over
the district than would perhaps be otherwise warranted by the evidence
derived from the chroniclers, the coins in question deserve attention ; and
it has been thought well to devote one of the appendices to a few words
respecting their discovery, and to the nature of the evidence which they
are supposed to afford.
It must be premised, however, that it is not intended in this, more than
in the previous appendix, to enter upon the general history of the Oxford
coinage, which, as already said, requires a treatise to itself.
There is only one type of coin, though many varieties bearing the
1 Ingram's Memorials of Oxford — New Inn Hall, p. 8. Ingram adds, 'King
Athelstan, who began his reign in 924, appointed two mints for Oxford; from
which an inference may fairly be drawn of its increased prosperity.' But on turning
to Athelstan's laws (printed in Thorpe, vol. i. p. 207), as regards the appointment
of mints the name of Oxford does not appear, nor can it be guessed at all what
authority Dr. Ingram had for his statement.
1 1'he Conquest of England, by John Richard Green, 1883, p. 144.
APPENDIX C. 367
letters (more or less accurately represented), orsna-forda ; and there
appear to have been two discoveries only, so far as have been recorded, in
which this type of coin has been met with.
The circumstances attending the first discovery are as follows : ' As far
back as 161 1 a hoard of coins was found in Lancashire, the description of
which is best taken from the engraved plate which represents thirty-five of
them : —
* A true purtraiture of sundrie coynes found the 8 of Aprill and
other daies following in the yeare 161 1 in a certaine place called the
Harkirke within the lordship of litle Crosbie [in ye parish] of Sephton
in the countie of Lancaster wch place — William Blundell, of the said
litle Crosbie Esquire inclosed from the residue of the said Harkirke
for the buriall of such Catholick recusantes deceasing either of the
said village or of the adjoyning neighbourhood as shoulde be denied
buriall at their parish church of Sephton V
No very accurate account of the circumstances attending the find has
been met with, and it is more than probable that the workmen, as is
usually the case with finds of this sort, got rid of several before the notice of
responsible persons was drawn to the discovery. Mr. Hawkins, in an
account of another find, which will be referred to immediately, says that
thirty-five coins only were noted2, of which all, excepting those of S. Peter,
were common in type to the later Cuerdale find. Only one is noticed of
the Orsnaford type, and it is possible this is the one which eventually
found its way to the Bodleian Library ; but it is difficult at this distance of
time, and with the careless descriptions and statements of writers and in-
accurate drawings of artists, to trace objects of this kind. It is also difficult
to discover when the letters orsna-forda were first attributed to Oxford ;
for it does not appear that in the seventeenth century any writer suggested
the application. So far from it, Spelman, in his life of iElfred, when
engraving the coin, and that in a work in which he brings together all
evidence he can respecting that king and especially as regards iElfred's
connection with Oxford, makes the remark : —
'What is meant by No. 14 I do not know; I imagine, however,
that it was a coin of iElfred of Northumbria, since the letters seem to
be of an ancient kind V
1 A copy of the plate is preserved at the end of Harleian MS., No. 1437.
Sephton is six miles south-west from Ormskirk, in Lancashire.
2 This small find is said to have consisted of the following : eleven coins of S. Peter,
one Archbishop Plegmund, six Alfred of ordinary type, one Alfred of the Oxford
type (fig. 22), eight Eadweard, four S. Eadmund, one Cunnetti, one Berengarius, one
Hludovicus, and one Carlus Rex. (Fr. Numismatic Chronicle, 1842, vol. v. p. 98.)
3 yElfredi Magni Anglorum Regis, a Johanne Spelman, etc., Oxonii: E Theatro
Sheldoniano, 1678. His words are: 'Quid per No. 14 significetur, ignoro*
conjector vero fuisse ^Elfredi Northumbrensis, cum literae illae ex antiquis fuisse
videntur.' At the commencement of the description of PI. Ill, which contains the
coins in question, he writes, ' Nummi in hac Tabula descripti reperti sunt Aprilis 8.
anno 161 1. in loco Harkirk dicto in paroecia Sephtoniae Comitatu Lancastriae, &
habentur turn manu descripti in Bibliotheca C. C. C. Oxon. turn aere incisi &
excusi.
368 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
In Bishop Gibson's translation of Camden's 'Britannia,' 1695, the same
coin appears on a plate (Tab. vi. No. 14) to illustrate the account of the Anglo-
Saxons, and with notes by the well-known Obadiah Walker, evidently
d 00 those of Spelman; the note in question runs thus: —
1 Of the fourteenth I understand neither side. The reverse seems
to be Bernwaled, unknown to me who he was1.'
Perhaps the earliest writer who makes the suggestion that the letters
are intended for Oxford is Sir Andrew Fountaine. He, in 1705, con-
tributed a treatise upon Saxon coinage to Hickes's Thesaurus2. He figures
in his first plate, No. 7, a fair representation of this type of coin, and
he writes thus : —
1 No. 7. orsna Alfred forda. I do not know what the letters
placed above and below the king's name mean except Oxonium, or,
as commonly called, Oxford, for this city at that time was custom-
arily written Oxnaforda. As to the letters rs, they may well be an
error of the moneyer for x. On the reverse bern fald mo netarius3.'
He does not say whence he derived the coin, but it appears to be
different in several respects from that engraved by Spelman, which came
from the Harkirk Collection.
In a second edition of Camden's Britannia (1722), the whole plate was
reproduced, but some additional notes were added from the pen of Ralph
Thoresby, F.R.S., one of which runs as follows: —
1 14. jelfred below orsna and above forda, as it is by Sir Andrew
Fountain more correctly described ; it seems designed for Oxford,
which was sometimes writ Oxnaford, as appears by the Saxon Chro-
nicle anno 912. Reverse: bernfaled or bernfald Regis Mone-
tarius, d and R being interwoven in the true draught of it4.'
Somewhat later (1750) Wise, in his catalogue of the coins in the Bodleian
Library, engraves a specimen of this type at the end of his PI. XVII., and
in describing the Anglo-Saxon coins which the plate illustrates, he makes
no mention of the specimen in the text (p. 97), but in his notes, printed
afterwards (p. 231), he refers to it as having been given, together with
1 Britannia, or a Chorographical Description of Great Britain, written in Latin
by William Camden, translated, etc., by Edmund Gibson, D.D., Bishop of London,
fol. 1695, p. cxliii.
2 Numismata Anglo-Saxonica ct Anglo-Danica breviter illustrata ab Andrew
Fountaine Eq. Aur. Oxoniae MDCCV. (forming a portion of Hickes's Linguarum
Vett. Scptcnlrionalium Thesaurus, etc.), Part III. p. 169.
3 The words in the original run: 'Nescio quid Literae supra et infra Regis
nomen positae denotent nisi Oxonium seu vulgo Oxford : oppidum enim illud turn
temporis scribi solitum est Oxnaforda. Quod attinet ad literas R s erratum
habcri possint opificis pro x. In aversa parte, BERN FALD mo netarius'
4 Britannia, etc., second edition, fol. 1722, Plate II. No. 14, p. cxc. It is
curious how the i> in BERNVALD came to be read as R, and it is so on Fountaine's
plate which Thoresby must have seen, though not on Walker's plate. The two
letters being united must be a guess, as no example warrants it; in all the coins
there is but one letter, and that plainly a D.
APPENDIX C. 369
another coin, to the Bodleian Library while his work was in the press, by
John Drake, the York antiquary, and he thus describes the two coins : —
' One of Edward the Confessor, . . . the other of our founder
Alfred, and likewise stamped with the name of the University
ALFRED OKSNAFORDA sElfredus Oksnaforda + + + BERNFALD MO.
Bernfaldus Monetarius V
Wise does not admit his obligation to Sir Andrew Fountaine's notes, and
leaves it to be inferred that what he gives is his own interpretation of the
coin. Yet there is little reason to doubt he has based his statement on
those notes. But Sir Andrew does not say the R is a k, nor does his
engraving show it ; nor do any of the coins of this type in the Bodleian
Collection warrant the statement, or the broken R as he represents it in
his plate and in his text. It appears to be based only on a misconception
of Sir Andrew Fountaine's theory.
Still a little later (1773) we fin'd a development of the myth in the follow-
ing passage in Sir John PeshalPs edition of Anthony a Wood's Antiquities
of Oxford : —
'Money was coined here in this King's Name, called Ocsnafordia, or
as others will, Oksnafordia. Ks vel cs for x being often used V
But while his work professes to follow Anthony a Wood, it may be
remarked that this passage, like many others, is absolutely an interpolation
on the part of Sir John Peshall ; no intimation whatever is given to the
reader that it is such, leaving it to be inferred that Anthony a Wood was
acquainted with the discovery, and that he acquiesced in the theory that
the coins were struck at Oxford.
There seems no reason to doubt that the engravings given both by
Fountaine and Wise are intended
for the one coin now in the Bod-
leian, catalogued No. 90. An en-
graving of the coin is given in
Ruding's admirable work on the
coinage of Great Britain. It is
figured and described thus 3 : —
' 14. Obv. ALFRED ORSNAFORDA, Oxford. Rev. BERHV VSD MO,
17! Bodleian Lib.' [it should be bernv vidmo.]
1 ' Priusquam autem hanc diatribam claudam gratias agendas esse duco CI. Jo.
Drake Antiquario Eboracensi ob duos Sterlingos, post schedas nostras prelo
liberatas, armario Bodl : donatos : Unum Edwardi Confessoris .... alteram funda-
toris nostri ^Elfredi, simulque Academiae nomine insignitum/ etc. — Nummorum
Antiquorum scriniis Bodlcianis reconditorum catalogus. Oxon. 1756, p. 231.
2 Peshall's City of Oxford, London, 1773, p. 10. Wood's original MS. is
preserved in the Bodleian Library, and an examination of this part of the work
shows that no trace of the passage exists, nor indeed of many other passages which
Sir John Peshall has inserted, at the same time tampering with the text in order
to introduce them.
3 Ruding's Annals of the Coinage of Great Britain, third ed. 1840, vol. ii. p. 288,
and Plates of Anglo-Saxon Coins, PI. XVI. fig. 14. Ruding, in commenting on the D
being changed into R, says ' Wise seems, with unpardonable negligence, to have
relied upon Sir A. Fountaine's representation instead of inspecting the coin itself.'
Bb
370 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
In 1840 one of the largest finds of Saxon coins which has ever occurred
took place at a village called Cuerdale ', also in the county of Lancaster,
.soiiR' twenty-one miles from Sephton before mentioned. This hoard con-
sisted of nearly 7,000 silver coins, together with silver ornaments, most of
which had been purposely broken up into fragments, as if intended for the
melting-pot2. And since this discovery affords a considerable amount of
evidence, not only as to the character of this type of coins themselves in
respect of the varied spelling and other details, but also in respect of the
coins with which the type is associated, it is necessary to consider some of
the circumstances under which the coins were collected together.
The collection has been very minutely described by the late Edward
Hawkins in the Numismatic Chronicle, from which the following particu-
lars are derived3. In the find, amongst those coins which had not been
dispersed before the necessary precautions were taken, there were sixty-
four 4 specimens of silver pennies, which# are ascribed to what may be
called for convenience the Orsnaford type, though almost all varying from
each other in some slight particulars. As will be shown, in nearly all cases
the letters are displaced, sometimes very much so, reading partly back-
wards and partly forwards, and not always the right way upwards.
A representation of the coin numbered 22 in the series of engravings
accompanying Mr. Hawkins's paper on the subject is here given. He
^ — ^^ ^ observes that it is one of the very few
//fc^°|C^K 12 /s ^""NX which reads correctly, and it would
/^©ii&^^M /•'JjjJJjglKBDWi appear to be one struck with a very
(([BESFKllD^tjica $3 Wfi) similardie,thoughnotthesamedieas
\V r?«Artt rk El // V ^ ««^ // the Bodleian coin before referred to.
WW \^«g^ The legend, it will be seen, runs:
^txszz^ Obverse orsna ; then in another line
ELFRED + , and in the third line FORDA. Reverse BERNV+ + + ALDN0
(i.e. for M° or Moneta5).
1 Cuerdale is situated near Blackburn, Lancashire, and is about five and a half
miles distant to the west of it.
a For an account of the silver ornaments found, see Mr. Hawkins's paper in the
Archaeological Journal, 1847, vo1- iv- PP- IJI> l89-
3 The Numismatic Chronicle, vol. v. 1842, pp. 1-48 and 53-104.
4 Mr. Hawkins states fifty-four in the text, but in the appendix he mentions that
ten more came to hand afterwards. He also refers (p. 4) to a report made by
Mr. Hardy to the Duchy of Lancaster on the discovery ; but so far as has been
ascertained the report does not appear to have been printed. In the accounts
presented for the year 1840 there are several items of payment respecting the find.
e.g. 'To Mr. Hopkins, of Preston, for services in the matter of the coins found at
Cuerdale, 37/.' 'To Mr. William Miller, for survey and map of that part of the
River Kibble near Cuerdale in which the coins were found, 24/.' * Sundry expenses
attending the holding the commission at Preston for prosecuting Her Majesty's
title to the said coins found at Cuerdale 46/., besides 33/. to the solicitor and record
clerk. Also to Mr. Thomas Smart for an oak cabinet to hold the coins found at
Cuerdale, 5/. 14s. del. '—Parliamentary Papers, 1S41, vol. xiii. No. 124. pp. 36-38.
5 A set of specimens, containing this and most of the types here figured, and
others exhibiting the same kinds of varieties, are deposited in the British
Museum.
APPENDIX C.
371
Had it not been for some specimens of this type apparently more perfect
than the rest, the reading of the legend on many of the coins would have
been hopeless. For instance, in Nos. 23 and 24 given by Mr. Hawkins*
the letters are so jumbled that it is very hard to conceive that any regular
moneyer could have been so unskilful in making his die. So far as they
can be read at all, the following appears to be the result : —
23
ANc/dAJ ondla
aa^^L^: = + + +
VIIRVO AN^ED
24
VaaOF BI3RIV
CELFRED = + -f +
VIIZIIo AIDIIo
It will be seen that not only the spelling is often reversed, but that some
of the letters themselves are so, that is, the moneyer has made the punch
for his die the wrong way : several letters also are upside down. Still it
may be imagined that on each of the coins the moneyer was trying to produce
on the obverse the name of jelfred and on the reverse the name of the
moneyer bernvald. That he was trying to produce also on the obverse
of each the name of orsna forda is not quite so certain. In No. 23 he
may have copied the fasna from a type coin with forda, but it shows
a considerable divergence ; and at the top of No. 24 he has given in reverse
order the letters comprising forda, and the other line in this might be
read backwards as onsna (the s or z being made of three pieces), though
the last two letters may be noted as having a marked resemblance to the
no or mo of the reverse K
Mr. Hawkins figures also an example (No. 25) belonging to this type of
coin which, while it has elfrid across the middle of the obverse and is in
other respects very similar in general character to the rest, has certainly
something very far removed from Orsnaforda on that side, and on the re-
verse something very different from the name of Bernwald 2. The engraving
1 As to Or?naford it will be found that of the ten letters which comprise the
word only seven are common to the original and the supposed copy; they are
in no order, except that the first three give s, N, A backwards ; while the moneyer
has inserted A, n, v, instead of o, r, d. As to the Bernvald it is the same ; seven
letters are common to each (but in worse order than the last), and A, N, D instead
of v, m, b, inserted.
2 In Silver Coins of England, by Edward Hawkins, revised by R. LI. Kenyon,
1876, p. 128, the following note occurs on this coin : ' The legend on the reverse
of the two coins found at Cuerdale is certainly not an imitation of this (i. e. of
BERHV aldho), but a comparison of figs. 23, 24, 25 makes it, I think, pretty clear
that the letters above and below the king's name on the obverse of 25, which look
like virif IRISI, are intended for the same as those on 23 and 24, and that they
B b 3
372
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
fig. 26 is given partly because it affords another example of what is sup-
posed to be the correct reading of ORSNUFORDA and of bernvald mo, and
partly because it has on the reverse, instead of the three ordinary crosses,
a long cross, with two cross bars at the base possibly intended for steps,
making what is heraldically termed a cross Calvary, and a pellet for orna-
ment in each of the four corners of the cross. There are other examples
of this treatment of the reverses of coins, but they are rare.
Mr. Hawkins gives another example. No. 27 exhibits the name aelfred
in the usual way around the coin instead of across it, and instead of Orsna-
forda it has a more common form rex doro, giving to iElfred the title
of King of Kent ; this is found on coins which there is little reason to doubt
were struck by the king's authority. It has also bvrnvald mo on the
reverse very clearly.
Lastly, Mr. Hawkins figures a silver halfpenny (No. 28) which he attri-
butes to the Oxford Mint, one single specimen only of the kind having been
found l. The letters are not easy to be deciphered, but the following are
probably what they were intended for by the moneyer.
Obverse, onai ; then v^ijia ; then eiieii.
Reverse. ONSN ; then + + + ; then EODRA.
Here what is intended for Alfred's name stands in the midst of letters
which appear to defy any interpretation. The first two letters look as if
intended for NO (though to be read backwards) and MO, implying that we
had the name of the moneyer 2 ; but read forwards or backwards no name
can be suggested 3. On the reverse, however, we have what must
must not therefore be forced into the name of some other mint. ... It is possible,
however, that these and the other blunders of this type may have been coins struck
by the Danes ; or they may have some connection with a coin of Eadward the
Elder, which reads IIDRCIRICI on the reverse.'
1 Another halfpenny was found, but this resembled the ordinary penny type with
Alfred and Orsnaforda on the obverse, and Bernvald on the reverse.
2 If, however, it is ON (which in later coins frequently precedes the name of the
place), we have here on DIENEN (wherever that may be), and something other
than a place must be found for the ONSNEODRA.
'J See ante, p. 1 16.
APPENDIX C. 373
be another form of the name Orsnaforda. The second and fourth letters
may both be intended for an n, while the third seems to be composed
somewhat after the manner of a letter in the last line of the obverse of
No. 24, and may be intended for s but has more the appearance of a z.
The name would therefore reads onzneodra. Such then are some of the
chief forms of the word which the Cuerdale find affords, and on which
reliance is placed to prove that the coins in question were struck in Oxford.
When we come to consider the date of the deposition of the hoard we
have the following facts to help us. Speaking in round numbers, of the
7000 coins, only 2750 can be definitely assigned to English origin, and of
these the following are the chief.
23. King iEthelstan 870-890. 1. Abp. Ceolnoth 830-870.
857. King iElfred 872-901. 59. Abp. Plegmund 891-923.
1770. Saint Eadmund 45, King Eadward 901-925.
To these, two of iEthelred (possibly the East Anglian King, circa 860),
and one Ciolwulf (probably the King of Mercia in 874) have to be added.
The result as to date is that the collection and deposition of the coins must
have been after the year 901, and judging by the ratio of the coins to the
respective reigns of iElfred and Eadward, soon after — that is, before the
year 910. It will be observed that the bulk of the coins, viz. 1770, or over
three-fifths of the English coins, have the name of S. Edmund. The
occurrence of the letter a frequently in the centre of the obverse seems
to imply that this large number were not probably the coinage of the
tributary King of East Anglia, martyred Nov. 20, 870, but were issued from
the Abbey of S. Edmund at Bury, named in his honour. The peculiarity
of these coins is that they have the most extraordinary varieties of spelling
imaginable both as to the obverse and reverse. Mr. Hawkins gives some
460 varieties, including some few which may be intended for S. Edmund
or may not1. Still the number is very large, and why so many in the
collection found in Lancashire should have been struck in East Anglia,
supposing that the legend implies this, it is most difficult to determine.
To these seventeen hundred coins, therefore, no definite date can be
assigned. On examining the eight hundred Alfred coins (nearly a third of
the whole number) there are one or two which are supposed to have the
1 There are variations, such as sceadmundr, sceadioivnde, scecadmuni,
and the like, of which there are some three hundred varieties, depending mainly
on the transposition of the letters ; the remainder, like sceaniyio, H. srcaiivii:e,
esdanemrvne eisinixivdci, erdiividafci, FiDCiVMCiAaos, present, besides
transposition, the insertion of several letters not belonging to the inscription at
all. The variety of the reverses is still more puzzling. Here are one or two
examples taken hap-hazard, which are supposed to contain the names of the
moneyers : — aenoiinsom, dxoiyie vionet, eratinofino, eyriviobiadt,
iooaiiiONEAHAi, iyireccndtioi. There are, however, specimens with similar
letters a little more correctly placed, which enable the numismatist to group them
in some sort of order, and here and there surmise at least what the moneyer was
attempting to produce, in spite of the conspicuous failure of his production. Had
the monks of S. Edmund been amusing themselves by trying their unaccustomed
hands at coinage, they would scarcely have produced a more extraordinary series.
374 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
place of coinage named upon them. A single specimen has on the reverse
the three letters RXA arranged one above the other and forming the whole
of the inscription, and these letters are supposed to imply that the coin was
struck at Exeter. Another coin with ELFRBD REX has the letters CVITREN
forming a kind of monogram, and Mr. Hawkins writes: —
1 The workmanship is very rude, and they can scarcely be considered
genuine coins of Alfred, struck by his authority, but the fabrications
of some false coiner ; but we are not sufficiently acquainted with the
practices of such persons in those days to be able to explain the mode
of manufacturing or the motive of issuing unauthorized pieces of a
value scarcely inferior to those of the general currency of the country ;
and yet it can scarcely be admitted that coins so barbarous in execution
as the above two pieces, and so blundered in the inscriptions as some
hereafter to be noticed, could have issued from the established royal
mints. The meaning of the letters upon the reverse have eluded
explanation : they are copied from French coins, which have hitherto
been of extreme rarity, but of which the present deposit contains many
hundreds, noticed in a future page V
There are also twenty-three specimens which contain the London
monogram, and may therefore be reasonably supposed to have been struck
there ; this monogram, it may be mentioned, occurs only on the coins of
King Alfred. The coins with doro on the obverse, as already said, were
not necessarily struck at Canterbury, as the full inscription is jELFRED rex
doro. There were but forty-five coins of Alfred's successor Eadward,
and the most noticeable point is that one specimen has the letters bad on
the reverse, and therefore is supposed to have been struck at Bath. The
coins with Archbishop Plegmund on the obverse instead of the name of the
king are fifty-nine in number 2, and though in no case does doro appear on
the reverse as the place of mintage, it may be presumed that the arch-
bishop had the coins struck in the metropolis over which he presided. One
point with regard to this may be noted, and that is that the name
birnvald appears as the moncyer, the same name 3 which appears on the
reverse of the Orsnaford type.
With respect to the three thousand coins which have been supposed to
have been collected on the continent, and which are found mixed with the
others, there seems to be no hint given in the chronicles how the coins should
have come to be so, except that here and there we read of the raids
which the Danes made up the Seine and other rivers in France. It is pos-
sible, however, the silver may have been exported into England in exchange
1 Numismatic Chronicle, vol. v. p. 14. At the same time, may it not be that this
monogram is of the same type as several others, more or less in the form of mono-
grams, in which E N ■ C R stand for ' In Christo,' and that their devices are a bad
imitation of the inscriptions on coins of the Lower Empire, in which E N x cv and
B N <-> E 00 tare frequent. The presence also of an attempt at an A and fl is often
apparent.
2 In one case the names of both the king and bishop occur on the obverse.
3 It should be noted, however, that the variations seem to imply that the name
of Flegmund's moneyer was correctly written BIRNVALD, and that of the Orsnaford
coins constantly BERNVALD.
APPENDIX C. 375
for iron or copper or other produce. The consideration of these questions,
however, would perhaps throw no special light upon the origin of the
Orsnaford type. At the same time it must be observed that the dates of
the English series are practically corroborated by the foreign series. Some
fourteen of hludovicvs pius must be ascribed to a date previous to 840.
While those of Eudes or Odo, of Lambert and of Berengarius, bring the
dates of others down quite to the end of the ninth century. But besides
those with the names of known kings on the obverse and the places of
mint on the reverse, including names of many well-known cities in France,
such as Toulouse, Limoges, Orleans, etc., a considerable number have
names of kings which cannot be identified with any certainty, and others
which cannot be identified at all. Nearly five hundred have on the obverse
letters which read ebraice civitas (and some have this on the reverse).
It has been supposed to be Evreux by some, by others York, but there
seems to be a considerable difficulty in accepting either \ Again, eighteen
hundred have CUN : neti in various forms on what is presumed to be the
reverse, the obverse being of much the same character as those which have
ebraice civitas. Again, some three hundred have the text Mirabilia
fecit ; and lastly, twenty-six are distinctly oriental.
There is one point which seems to come out more clearly, perhaps, in
considering the foreign examples than the English ones, and to this atten-
tion is drawn by Mr. Hawkins in the following words : —
' The monogram of Charles, and the lozenge-shaped <J> in the
legend dns ds <> REX are surely derived from coins of Charles and
Odo ; but it is not therefore necessary to suppose that either of those
kings sanctioned their issue.
' Under all these circumstances it may be contended, with much
show of probability, that these coins derive from France many of the
peculiarities which attach to them ; that they were not issued by any
personages of permanent and acknowledged authority, but by some of
those northern warriors who by violence and force of arms obtained
a temporary possession of some portions of France, and had also so
much connection with England as to render probable the employment
of English workmen in the fabrication of some of these coins, thereby
introducing some peculiarities of the English mint with the blundered
imitations of French names, types, and legends. These coins may be
considered as imitations rather than originals, substantially French,
but marked by some English peculiarities2.'
Whether or not the circumstances are best explained by the theory of
the employment of English workmen in France, it is important to the
question at issue to take note of the evidence for the imitation which seems
to have gone forward without the consent of the king whose name and
1 From the character of the obverse on some, dns ds. rex, on others a peculiar
monogram consisting of a cross with letters at the ends and the letters en . cr
variously placed, and what may be intended for A and fi (see ante, note 1, p. 374),
one would be almost inclined to think the ebraica civitas might be intended for
Jerusalem, and that the coins partake rather of the character of medals.
2 Numismatic Chronicle, vol. v. p. 94.
37<5 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
monogram appear. And the evidence derived from the French coins
illustrates and confirms also the remark made previously by Mr. Hawkins
respecting certain coins of Alfred l. In speaking of the Canterbury type of
coins found in the Cuerdale series, Mr. Hawkins had written: —
' Some of these have the legends so utterly unlike the usual coins
that they can with difficulty be believed to have issued from any
authorized mint. They appear, however, to be of the proper weight
and fineness, and the transition from the correct reading to the most
blundered is so gradual and imperceptible, that there does not appear
to be any possibility of drawing a line of demarcation between the
genuine coins and supposed imitations.'
The consideration, then, of the foreign series, while it tends to confirm
the date arrived at from the evidence of the English series, seems rather
than otherwise to increase the difficulties in coming to any satisfactory
conclusion as to the origin or purpose of the hoard.
Next, it is most difficult to account for the deposition of the hoard at this
particular place ; and when it is borne in mind that the only authenticated
specimens of this type of coin professing to be struck in Oxford have been
found on or near the banks of the Ribble in Lancashire, it will be seen that
this difficulty ought to be met before assuming that the coins in question
were struck by the direct authority of King Alfred, and at Oxford. There
can, however, be no question that the bulk of the 2,300 English coins repre-
sent types belonging to the southern counties, and profess to be struck there,
and therefore it may be concluded that the hoard had been transported
northwards as a whole. As already said, the discovery was made at Cuerdale,
close to the river Ribble ; in fact it was while the workmen were engaged
in repairing the river banks that they found them. Associated with the
7000 coins there were nearly 1000 ounces of silver ingots and of fragments
of silver ornaments, evidently broken up for the purpose of melting. So
far it would appear that it was some treasure which had been collected for
a certain purpose, and as the spot on the river Ribble where they were
found is not far from the mouth of that river, it might reasonably be
supposed that it was money collected and paid to the Danes, who were
about to carry it away by sea, and that, perhaps, being surprised, they may
have landed and buried the treasure on the bank, and no one of the party
having an opportunity of returning, it lay buried for centuries till it was
accidentally discovered in 1840. So large an amount of metal of so great
variety of shape could not well have been the collection of any one indivi-
dual. It must have been some public payment, and probably, therefore,
one of those payments made to the Danish marauders so frequently referred
to by the chroniclers. Metal of all kinds would be collected ; coins which
had been issued, as well as coins which from their blundered spellings the
moneycrs had not issued at all. Still, this is only supposition ; the evidence
is not sufficient to determine the matter : all that can be said is that the
bulk of the coins do not appear as if they had ever been in circulation.
Before concluding the evidence, there are one or two peculiar cir-
cumstances which have to be noted in respect of the Orsnaford coins
1 See ante, note p. 374.
APPENDIX C. 2>11
themselves — namely, the arrangement of the inscriptions ; and these cir-
cumstances go some way to confirm the evidence derived from the general
aspect of the hoard as a whole, that is, to render it highly improbable that
the bulk of the coins in question were struck by the regular moneyer of
the several kings, and in the ordinary way.
It should be observed first that all those of the true Orsnaford type have
the name of the king inscribed transversely across the coin instead of around
the border. It cannot be said that there are no other instances of this
arrangement amongst the English coins of the period; but they are exceed-
ingly rare. Besides one or two instances amongst the coins of the Mercian
kings \ three later examples may be given. One of King Alfred's coins,
three specimens of which were found in the Cuerdale series, but hitherto
unknown, has +aelfred rex saxonum in four lines. Another coin,
also a new type and found in the same series, has eadvveard rex
saxonum in four lines. There is also figured in Ruding one of Hartha-
cnut (a.d. 1039), which has on the obverse hardacnut rex in dano.
The irregularity of these three examples is due probably to the fact that it
was required for some reason that the king's title should be given in full.
When we look at the Orsnaford inscription, no such reason can be
assigned, since the name, supposing it to be that of the place where the
coin was struck, could not be part of the title and does not belong to the
obverse. In looking through several hundreds of coins which are figured
or described in the works of Ruding, Hawkins, etc., and especially through
the series of the Cuerdale find, no instances have been observed in which
the place of mint is distinctly given on the obverse with the name of the
king 2. If Bernwald is the moneyer and Orsnaford the place of mint, they
ought both to be together, and both on the reverse. In this case there
would have been ample room. Since then, arguing from analogy, the only
reason for the name being placed across the coin would be the extent of the
inscription, and the only reason for the additional words to the king's
name, would be that it was desired to give some definite title to the king,
it follows, in order to bring the coin into conformity with the rule of the
coins of the ninth, tenth, or early part of the eleventh century, that we
ought a priori to interpret the letters as containing, or at least as intended
to contain, something of the nature of a title; not the name of a place, still
less the place of coinage.
1 Some one or two coins ascribed to Ethelbald (a. d. 716), and reading
eadvald rex, and some also of Offa (A. D. 755) reading offa M[erciorum] rex,
and one of Coenwulf (a. d. 821) reading coenvvlf M[erciorum] rex, have the
inscription written across the coin on the obverse, seemingly on account of the
large letters, for which there would not have been sufficient space round the edge.
2 Elfrid's name occurs with DORO for Canterbury, but the correct coins all run
AELFRED REX DORO, and amongst some forty varieties, including many jumbled
versions of the above, the R is always repeated — that is, one belongs to Rex, the
other to Doro, e. g. eterdevoroe, eledrnvoro, etc. ; often the Rex itself can
be found, e.g. rlex + froedor, refdvrha, edre, etc. Possibly they may have
been struck at Canterbury ; but this does not affect the question at issue. So, in the
same way, doro occurs on the obverse in Archbishop Plegmund's coins, but that
because he was Archbishop of Canterbury and the name is part of his title.
37 tf THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
A.-rain, in another way the form orsnaforda in itself militates against
the theory that it is the plaee of mintage. In the early instances of
coinage the names of places are as a rule excessively abbreviated. A
glance at the variations of the word Oxford itself, given in the previous
appendix ' is sufficient. Of some thirty varieties, including o and ox, it will
be seen how only one reaches even Oxnef. Not one reaches even Oxnefo
or Ozneford, and this fairly represents the mode of treating most names of
places. In looking through all those ending in ford, the last syllable is
very rarely expressed. Bedford, which is very frequent, and is found as
Be or Bdfo, only rarely reaches Bedafo and Bedafor, never Bedeford.
And though in the case of Hcrford (qy. Hertford or Hereford) a single
instance is found, and one in the case of Theotford (Thetford), no instance
whatever has been found of the addition of the case ending, as in forda;
and this spelling, it must be remembered, occurs on all the coins where the
word Orsnaford is readable.
And even if these inconsistencies are allowed to be of no value, there
still remains the fact of the invariable introduction of the letter R in the
form orsna ; this is inconsistent not only with any known spelling of
Oxford, but any probable spelling of Oxford. No variations of spelling
of Ox, or even of Osen, could have been ORS 8. The answer to those who
contend for the R being possibly a K, and that the moneyer might have
been guided by the sound, is first that no analogous case of the spelling X
by ks on a coin has been observed ; and next, that the R appears to have
been struck throughout with the same die as is employed for the same
letter in forda. The theory of the K seems to have originated through
a blunder of Wise3, with whom the desire of connecting the name
with Oxford seems to have outweighed his caution, for the coin which
he evidently used does not bear out his theory, nor, so far as has been
observed, do any of the other specimens.
These then are the several points in the evidence of which account must
be taken before arriving at the conclusion that the name signifies Oxford.
It has been shown that, so far as evidence is forthcoming, the only place
where the Orsnaford coins have been found are near the Ribble, in
Lancashire. No recorded specimen has ever been found in Oxfordshire or
in the south of England. The general character of the coins with which
the Orsnaford type is associated is that which, according to Mr. Hawkins,
implies that the coins were struck without the authority of the king whose
name they bear, and by moneyers who had no authority and who
1 See ante. p. 349.
2 liorsaforri, however, would have been a good name of a place. There is one
spelt in Domesday Ilorseford (fol. 301 a, col. 2), now Horseforth, five miles north-
west of Leeds in Yorkshire ; and, in the same county, Hoselord (fol. 332 b, col. 2),
the name of which does not seem to have survived. In Norfolk also there is a
Hosforda (fol. 155 a, col. 1), now Horsford, four miles north of Norwich. The
omission of the 11 on the inscription would surely be more reasonable than the
insertion of an R where it did not exist ; and so those who argue on the theory
that the word represents the name of a place ought to choose one of those here
named rather than Oxford.
3 See ante, p. 369.
APPENDIX C. 379
imitated other coins, blundering the inscriptions to a considerable extent ;
so that, while a very large portion is rendered unintelligible, no confidence
can be placed upon the readings even of those where the letters seem to
form intelligible words.
It will perhaps, before concluding, be convenient to exhibit a series of
the readings of this type of coin, so far as they can be represented by ordi-
nary Roman letters, in order that some idea may be formed of the variety.
There are four specimens in the Bodleian Library of the true Orsnaford
type, of which one only is authenticated to have come from Guerdale, the
remaining three very possibly, in the absence of any direct information
obtainable about the coins, from Harkirk x. As has already been pointed
out, Wise mentions a coin given by John Drake, of York, to the Bodleian,
which is the same as that figured by Sir Andrew Fountaine ; but there
is nothing to connect this, or indeed any of the Bodleian coins, with that
engraved by Spelman, and re-engraved by Bishop Gibson2. It has been
thought well also to give the two next coins in the Bodleian Collection,
since they contain both the name of iElfred and the moneyer Bernvald,
and are very similar to the others in general appearance.
No. 89. ORSIIA ALFRED FORDA BERIV + + + ALDMO.
„ 90. ORcrtNA 3TIFRED FORDA BERNV + + + VldMO.
„ 91. OAcaNA 3TIFRED FOI I A 93RNY+ + + VTOIIO.
Ad. ORSIIA iELFRED FORDA BETIIV + + + ALDIIO.
„ 92. + EFD<>RONVDED3 BAERN • EDEM<>.
„ 93. AEIFREDREXDORO BARNV . . ALDM<>.
To the British Museum were presented a very large series of the Cuerdale
Collection, and amongst them thirty-two of the Orsnaford type4. They
possess no examples of the Orsnaford type, except those which came from
that hoard.
1 There is some reason to suppose that most of these coins came from the
Ashmolean Museum. How or when they were given has not been ascertained,
though by the courtesy of the Keeper, the writer of this has had access to the
registers and catalogues of that collection. The search is rendered somewhat more
difficult by the circumstance that the Ashmolean Collection, the Ingram Collection,
and the Bodleian Collection were mixed together when the coins from the former
were removed to the latter.
2 See ante, pp. 368-9. Both Spelman and Bishop Gibson, as well as the Harkirk
engraving, have firda instead of forda. In some specimens (notably No. 5
of the B. Mus. series) the letter has much the appearance of an 1, more so than
in any Bodleian specimen. Spelman also gives the s lengthways instead of upright,
and has aled mo instead of ald mo : probably therefore, Sir Andrew Fountaine
had access to the one which eventually came to the Bodleian, and Spelman to
some other of which a duplicate of the obverse occurs in the Cuerdale series ; but
where the original coin has been deposited has not been ascertained.
3 The two coins 92, 93 have the obverse inscription in the usual way round the
edge, and not in three lines across as all the others have which are here noted.
4 Thirty-one only were presented at the time. They acquired after, by purchase,
the last, which is here numbered 32, but there is no doubt it came from Cuerdale.
The coins have no number affixed, but they are numbered here as they occur in the
drawer of the cabinet which contains them.
;cSo
THE EARLY
HISTORY
OF OXFORD.
A selection is here given1 from that series.
i.
oRSN \
ALFRED
FORDA
BERIV +■ +
+ ALDIO.
2.
()Rx II A
ELFRED+
FORDA
BERV + +
+ ALDNO.
3-
ORN \
EFRED+
FORDA
BERIIA+ +
+ ALDIIO.
5.
OR/-. II \
ALFRED
FIRDA*
BERNA + 4
+ ALDEIO.
6.
ORSHA
KLIRl.D
10 iRDA
BERIIA+ +
+ AIIDNO.
9-
OReoN \
ELFRED
FORDA
BERNV + +
+ ALIIO.
1 1.
ORsIl \
2EFRED +
EORDA
BERNV + +
+ ALDIIO.
18.
OISN \
JELFRED
FORAT
BERIIV+ +
+ ALDIIO.
20.
on • zn \
^:likd
FoRDA
BERNV + +
+ ALDNO.
22.
ORc^IIA
jELFRED
F:RDA
AIIR39 + +
+ oiiai<:.
25.
ONINA
VFLRID
JORDA
BERIIV + +
+ VLDHO.
26.
ONZNA
ALFRED
ORDA
BERNV + +
4 ALDMO.
27.
• SUA
ELFID +
FORDA
BERNV • .
• ALDNO.
28.
OAc^IIA
VI FRED
FOIIA
33RNV + +
+ Aiano.
29.
OISNA
iELFRKD
EORDA
BERNV + +
+ ALD.MO.
32.
VIRIJ
ELFRID
IRISI3
BERNV + +
+ ALDNO.
The three following probably came from Cucrdale, and were presented
by the Rev. John Griffiths to Wadham College4 : —
1. OAmUA 3TIFRED FORDA BERNV •:••:•.:. AiailO.
2. ORc^IIA ELFRED FORDA BERNV + + +ALDIIO.
3. ORc/)c/> ATFRED FORDA BERNE + + +VFCIIIO.
The next is from the private cabinet of Arthur Evans, M.A., Keeper of the
Ashmolean Museum, and probably also belonged to the Guerdale series: —
ORSHA JEFRED+ EORDA BERNV + + +ALIDIIO.
To the above varieties have to be added the further varieties already
given on pp. 371, 372.
In holding the view that oksnaforda stands for Oxford, it is not only
that one or two slight exceptions to the rules, gathered from analogy, are
assumed, but, as has been shown in the previous pages, several, and some
important ones ; and these, as will be seen above, are combined in
all the examples. Moreover, these coins are associated with others the
readings of which show that they are bad copies of other types, of which
in many cases what the originals were can only be conjectured. And the
1 Those omitted are very similar to others which are given, though very few
cases have been observed where there is reason to suppose the same die has been
used for two coins, and none in which it has been used for more than two. The
same forms, however, of individual letters frequently occur, showing that the same
punch was employed.
2 The I in FIRDA is really a small o crushed, with a pellet above it, so that it
has the appearance of an I. This obverse may have been from the same die as
the one engraved by Spelman, but the reverse is not the same.
■' The obverse of this coin is figured by Hawkins. See ante, p. 372, fig. 25.
4 These specimens were presented just before his death. So iar as the writer
gathered from conversation they had been purchased from London dealers, and
were therefore most probably from the Cuerdale series. Their appearance is just
the same as the others — that is, they look as if they had been lying beneath a weight,
and had never been in circulation.
APPENDIX C. 381
question is whether the chance similarity of the mere sound of the letters
which some moneyer has stamped on his coins, and other moneyers have
more or less exactly or more or less erroneously copied, is sufficient to
warrant the assumption that in this coin we have evidence of Alfred having
authorized a moneyer at Oxford to strike coins with his name thereupon,
and the name of the place where they were struck. It is not required, nor
would it be of any purpose to suggest counter-theories as to what the
letters may have been intended to mean1. The variations, it will be
seen, are so many, even in specimens of this one type of coin, as to
lead one to be cautious in accepting any one reading as the original
from which the others were derived, and any one variation might,
from falling into the hands of an ignorant moneyer, become the type of
another series of variations. This is the only theory which can possibly
account for the very divergent varieties which are found associated with
several types. A few specimens of the S. Edmund type have already been
given in a note2. It is the same with the Alfred Rex Doro, one or two
examples of which have been given in another note3; and in the two Oxford
specimens it will be observed how No. 93 reads almost correctly, and how
No. 92 diverges both in the reading of the obverse and reverse. But to
take the first three of the forty-one examples of blundered readings given
by Mr. Hawkins of the Alfred rex doro from Guerdale and with BERN
vald mo on the reverse type : —
ErERDEVOROE BVRLI ED MO.
EDRNEDAITORO BRVN ED MO.
^r^RDEVNORO BEREV EDI MO4.
Here we see the kind of variations which take place. It may be said
that there is no more variation in any one from the original than there is
one from another ; it is merely a shifting of letters, and perhaps here and
there a change from misreading, or from misrepresentation caused by un-
skilful handling of the punches with which the moneyer made the die.
Supposing, however, we take exactly the letters as they exist in the third
and only change their order, as moneyers so often do ; we have
ORTENjEFORDA BERIV IED MO.
Now the third and fourth letters are frequently found ' made up ' — that
is, each is composed of marks made by more than one punch ; and this is
1 The view that an unsatisfactory assumption must be accepted until a better
one is given is hardly tenable. Some of the points given in the above notes were
sent by the writer to the late Mr. Vaux, who read them at a meeting of the
Numismatic Society. The following is an extract from his letter to the writer on
the question : —
'44, Cornmarket, Oxford, Dec. 20, 1873.
* I read the paper as I promised on Thursday, but the meeting (as they
knew nothing of the question) followed ******, wh0 maintained that Orsnaford
must be Oxford till we could find another place in the N[orth] to answer for it, a
mode of reasoning which I said was no reasoning at all ! We must sift
this question to the bottom. — Ever yours, W. S. W. Vaux.'
2 See ante, p. 373, note 3. 3 See ante, p. 377, note 2.
4 Numismatic Chronicle, 1842, p. 20.
}8a THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
found sometimes to be so with the s in'the Orsnaforda, especially in those
cases where the letter in the preceding list is represented as z, and of which
a specimen will be found in figures 24 and ^8*. Allowing for the omission
of the K or P (which in the variation selected was redundant), and varying
the punch marks of the one letter only, we have actually the word Orsnaford.
But why should this be taken as a type, which is really much closer to
an existing variation of ' Alfred Rex Doro ' than that variation is to its own
type ?
It is not at all intended to insist upon this being the origin of the name
Orsnaforda, but to show that under the circumstances it would be most
rash to assume that we have in such a word a type, and not a variation2.
If there was really good ground for supposing the letters were intended for
the name of a place, it might be possible to imagine some accidental variation
from some form of that place, no specimen of which exists ; but as it does
not appear, from what has been said, to be capable of being the name of
a place, and does seem to be closely alluded to the name of a king and his
title, of which there are many examples, it seems more likely that it is an
unauthorised and much blundered copy of that name and title added to the
name itself.
However, as already said, the object of these notes has been not to put
forth any definite theory, but rather to lay fairly before the reader the
evidence on which the existing theory rests, leaving it to his judgment to
decide whether it is sufficient to warrant the theory that the coin was
struck at Oxford.
1 In No. 20 of the B. Mus. coins, the letter is singularly made up of four marks,
the same which go to make up the e's and f's.
2 Still it is very generally assumed to be so. Mr. Haigh, in a very valuable
article on the Coins of King Alfred, in the Numismatic Chronicle for 1870, p. 37,
gives one or two examples of the Orsnaford coin in his plates with the first R as
plain and as clear as the second R in that word. Yet when he comes to the
description of the coins he prints all the legends as oksnaforda, adding this
note, ' The reading of the name Oksnaforda is due to our regretted friend the late
Mr. Sainthill, and is certainly right. The R and K were easily confounded one
with another.' Surely in such a case he should have put the real reading of the
coins in the text, and the emendation in the note ; nor would it have been out of
place to have made good his assertion by giving some examples of the K on coins
to show how they might be mistaken ; and better still to have given an instance of
such occurring.
APPENDIX D.
THE PLATES.
I. The Domesday Survey relating to Oxford.
{As Frontispiece.}
The frontispiece to this volume is a facsimile of the first leaf of that
part of the Domesday Survey which contains Oxfordshire. Being produced
by the photozincographic process, the original document is not even handled
or touched by the copyist, and the reader is enabled to refer to an exact
representation. Of course the writing in the MS. is somewhat brighter
and clearer than the copy, since, from the nature of the process, the finer
lines do not always come out so firmly as they should ; still, for all practical
purposes it serves the purpose of the original.
A few words may perhaps be given here with respect to the volume from
which the page is copied. It is in folio, of about the same size as the page
on which it is here printed, and consisting of 380 leaves (= 760 pages) of
vellum closely written throughout in a small handwriting of the end of
the eleventh century, as the specimen from Oxfordshire well exhibits.
The volume commences with Kent (Chenth), and the shires follow in
series, first running from east to west, then from west to east. In the
first series, from Kent to Cornwall, the coast counties are all included, as
well as Berkshire ; then, starting from Middlesex, the next takes in
Hertford, Bucks, Oxon (that being No. 14 of the whole series), Gloucester
and Worcester, to Hereford. The third series begins with Cambridge,
and embraces Huntingdon, Bedford, Northampton, Leicester, Warwick,
Stafford, and Salop ; and the fourth, Chester, Derby, part of Lancashire,
Yorkshire, and Lincoln. The four northern counties, Northumberland
Cumberland, Westmoreland, and Durham, do not appear in the volume.
There is another volume of large octavo size, containing 450 leaves
(= 900 pages), which gives the survey of the three counties, Essex, Suffolk,
and Norfolk. No doubt the book which is preserved is but an abstract
of the original return, and it is thought that the Book of Ely and the
Book of Exeter, as they are termed, are exact copies of the original fuller
returns. Distinct from, but of the same character, as the Domesday
Survey are the Book of Winchester, made a.d. 1148, and the Boldon Book
(or Book of Durham), made a.d. 1183.
It will be observed that besides the portion relating actually to Oxford
itself, the page contains the Table of Contents to the whole volume. This
Table of Contents appears in all the other counties at the beginning, and
frequently, as in the Oxford Survey, some special particulars are given with
respect to the chief county town or towns, apart from the entries under
>S4
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the holdings of the king and those of the several tenants in capite. As
there has been no occasion to print this Table of Contents (since it refers
more especially to the county than to the city), a transcript of the remain-
ing portion of the page is given here. Many of the names however, it will
be observed, are the same as those who held mansions in Oxford, and these
have been pointed out in commenting on the Oxford list. At the same time,
the following list gives the remainder of the names of persons who, though
connected with the county, had no direct connection with Oxford. It is
here printed, like portions given in the appendix, in extended Latin, and as
it is practically only a list, no translation is needed : —
H
I.
ii.
in.
IV.
v.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.
XIIIJ.
XV.
XVI.
XVII.
XVIII.
XIX.
XX.
XXI.
XXII.
XXIII.
XXIIIJ.
XXV.
XXVI.
XXVII.
XXVIII
XXIX.
ic Annotantur Tenentes
TERRAS I
Rex Willelmus.
XXX.
Archiepiscopus Cantuari-
XXXI.
ensis.
XXXII.
Episcopus Wintoniensis.
XXXIII.
Episcopus Sarisberiensis.
XXXIIIJ.
Episcopus Execestrensis.
XXXV.
Episcopus Lincoliensis.
XXXVI.
Episcopus Baiocensis.
XXXVII.
Episcopus Lisiacensis.
XXXVIII.
Abbatia Abendoniensis.
XXXIX.
Abbatia delabatailge.
XL.
Abbatia de Wincelcumbe.
XLI.
Abbatia de Pratellis.
XLII.
Ecclesia S. Dyonisii pa-
XLIII.
risii.
XLIIIJ.
Canonici de Oxeneford et
XLV.
alii clerici.
XLVI.
Comes Hugo.
XL VII.
Comes Moritoniensis.
XL VIII.
Comes Ebroicensis.
Comes Albericus.
XLIX.
Comes Eustachius.
L.
Walterius gifard.
LI.
Willelmus filius Ansculfi.
LII.
Willelmus de Warene.
Lin.
Willelmus peurel.
LIV.
Henricus de fereires.
LV.
Hugo de bolebech.
LVI.
Hugo de Iuri.
LVII.
Robertus de Stadford.
LVIII.
. Robertus de Oilgi.
Rogerius de Iuri.
LIX.
n Oxeneford Scire.
Radulfus de Mortcmer.
Rannulfus peurel.
Ricardus de Curci.
Ricardus puingiand.
Berenger de Todeni.
Milo Crispin.
Wido de Reinbodcurth.
Ghilo frater Ansculf.
Gislebertus de gand.
Goisfridus de Mannevile.
Ernulfus de Hesding.
Eduuardus de Sarisberie.
Suain vicecomes.
Aluredus nepos Wigot.
Wido de Oilgi.
Walterius ponz.
Willelmus Leuric.
Willelmus filius manne.
Ilbodus frater Ernulfi de
hesding.
Reinbaldus.
Robertus filius Murdrac.
Osbernus gifard.
Benzelinus.
Judita comitissa.
Cristina.
Uxor Rogerii de Iuri.
Hascoit musard.
Turchil.
Ricardus ingania et alii
ministri regis.
Terra Willelmi comitis1.
Domesday Survey, fol. 154 a, col. 2.
APPENDIX D. 385
II. Map of Neighbourhood of Oxford to illustrate the
Early History of Oxford.
The primary object of this little map is to show the relative position of
the site of Oxford in regard to the ancient Roman roads, so far as they can
be traced, and to other evidences of Roman occupation, such as villas, etc. ;
the names of places therefore inserted on the map are chiefly those referred
to in Chapter III of the present work 1.
It is very difficult, and indeed may be said to be impossible, to trace the
exact lines of the Roman roads. That between Dorchester and Aldchester,
thanks to the late Professor Hussey's labours, can be marked with tolerable
accuracy, but the last few years have tended much to obliterate many parts
of it : and the western portion of the Akeman Street — that is, between Ald-
chester and Cirencester — can be followed on the Ordnance map without
much difficulty. For some few miles eastward of Aldchester also it is very
plain ; but as it approaches Aylesbury, amidst the upper confluents of
the river Thames, its course seems to be lost, and modern roads appear
completely to have taken its place. From Aylesbury to where it joins
what may be a part of the old Icknield Way the line of the Roman road
may well have followed the present high-road, which runs very straight.
It appears by the Ordnance map to have then passed through the
Chiltern Hills by the opening near to Tring, and continued its course
down a small valley formed by one of the tributaries of the Colne 2, past
Berkhampstead and Watford, and then joined the Waetling Street within
a Tew miles of London ; but the appearances may be deceptive. Messrs.
Sharpe and Petrie, in sketching the map which accompanies the Monumenta
Historica Britannica, make the road to cease after it has joined the
Icknield Way, and in the smaller diagram, which is inserted in the right-
hand corner of the present map, the lines of road suggested by these
editors has been put before the reader. It will be observed that they
carry on the Icknield Way northward, till it joins the Waetling Street near
Dunstable. This line has been omitted on the main map, since the writer
could not find sufficient evidence on the Ordnance Survey to warrant the
insertion. The discrepancy of the two maps requires this explanation, and
the matter is just as far connected with the subject of the present work
1 The Roman camps are marked O ; the British camps (0). The Roman
villas g ; and Roman and other remains generally /\.
2 The small streams of this district are very imperfectly marked on ordinary maps.
The little stream which rises to the east of Tring and flows down the valley in a
south-easterly direction is the Bulborne ; and' between Berkhampstead and Watford,
at a point due south of Hemel Hempstead, it is joined by the Gade. They both
flow together till they reach the Colne. It is this line of valley which it is
supposed the Roman road, in continuation of the Akeman Street, followed, and it
is followed in part by the London and North Western Railway now.
C C
386 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
that it affects the question of the way in which the Oxford district was
made accessible from the chief city of the country in Roman times. The
two great railway lines may be said, as regards the communication between
Oxford and London, to represent in a certain measure the system of the
Roman roads. The great Western road from London, it will be seen,
swept down much further to the south than the modern Great Western
Railway, which takes advantage of the opening in the range of chalk hills
near Walhnglord ; consequently, the Roman Way led the traveller down
to Silchester and Spene, some thirty miles to the south of Oxford. By
the North- Western route, however, in Roman times the way was less
circuituous than it is now -via Bletchley ; and if, as suggested, a road left the
Waetling Street a few miles out of London, and branched off to the west,
joining the Akeman Street a little way past Tring, it would have provided
as direct an access to the Oxford district as possible without crossing
directly over the highest parts of the Chiltern Hills.
It has been impossible on a map in so small a scale to give any idea of the
contour of the hills generally. The great range of the Berkshire Downs
has, however, been made prominent on the map, since it is so conspicuous
a feature in many of the views from the neighbourhood of Oxford looking
towards the south ; while the great British track-way along the highest part
of the ridge, and here and there the great British earthworks, are among
the best preserved monuments of this early period to be found in the
district. It is by no means certain how the track-way terminated at the
eastern end when it left the high level ; one branch seems to have led to
Moulsford ; one probably also to Streatley, and, having been used by the
Romans, it gave the name to the latter place.
The map, though intended chiefly to illustrate Chapter III, will, from
the introduction of this Berkshire range, with Cwichelmshloewe x in the
midst, be found useful in illustrating Chapters VII and VIII, as it was the
possession of this range which put the Abingdon and Wantage districts on
the north of it at the mercy of the Danes. It has been also possible to
include Reading within the limits of the map, so that it will illustrate the
circumstances of the battle of JEscesdun in 871, referred to on pp. 11 4-1 5.
Here and there names of places have been inserted which are mentioned
in other parts of the work, e.g. Bampton, Binsey, and Benson, which are
connected with the story of S. Frideswide, the subject of Chapter V 8.
As to the few hills which have been marked, they have been much exag-
gerated, so also throughout have the rivers. At the same time, the courses
of the streams and their several tributaries have been followed as accurately
as the small scale will allow, the exaggeration being only in the thickness
of the lines representing them. But drawn in this way, they better show
the natural drainage, and so exhibit the general lie of the country.
1 Marked on some of the Ordnance maps Scutchamfly, and called locally
' Scootchamly knob.'
2 Kirtlington ought to have been inserted (mentioned p. 140). It lies near the
left bank of the Cherwell, some three miles north of Kidlington, and so just to the
south of the Akeman Street. It may be noted, too, that the draughtsman has
accidentally changed Headington into Headlington.
APPENDIX D. 387
III. A Plan to illustrate the Early History of Oxford.
This, like the last map, is rather of the nature of a diagram, the object
of which is to give an idea of the extent of Oxford in the eleventh
century, as shown by the line of the medieval wall ; to exhibit the position
of the Castle in respect to the rest of the town ; and to mark also the
relative position of the churches. As the former map was intended to
illustrate Chapter III, so this is intended to illustrate especially Chapter XI.
For the matter inserted there is sufficient evidence, and it is intended
rather to supply the data from which the general character of the town at
the end of the eleventh century can be realised, than to attempt to make
a plan as it was at that time. The material is so slight for sketching such,
that the result would be only an imaginary plan after all.
The line of the city wall is given as it can be clearly traced by the
remains. None of the actual masonry is earlier than Henry the Third's
time, and there is probably but very little even of that ; still, for a good
part of the way the old foundations were no doubt followed in the re-
building and repairs which took place in the fourteenth and fifteenth century.
For the line of the Castle fortification the material is not so satisfactory.
We have to depend upon some rather inaccurate maps of the sixteenth
century. Still there can be little question as to the general position of the
ditch and the general course of the streams in the vicinity.
All the churches are inserted which are named in the list from the
Abingdon and Oseney Cartulary and from the Domesday Survey (see ante
p. 284), and also those in the later S. Frideswide's charter (see p. 285),
which, as has been said, might imply the churches were in existence by the
close of the eleventh century *.
The parish boundaries have been inserted as they now exist. Such
boundaries do not change much, and we may therefore consider that they
represent somewhat the ecclesiastical divisions of the city at the close of
the eleventh century. As there is no material in a practicable shape for
drawing the boundary lines of the old parishes of S. Edward and S. Mil-
dred, which have been incorporated with All Saints' and S. Michael's parish
respectively, this has not been attempted.
For the same reason the chief streets have been inserted as they now
exist. It is impossible to draw the smaller streets and lanes as they
existed, with any approach to accuracy. It is necessary to imagine that
New Inn Hall Street and Ship Street were once continued round the
whole course of the wall on the inside.
All along the north side, and partially along the east side, excavations
show that there was a tolerably deep ditch. Whether there was such on
1 To these have been added S. Thomas's and the site of Rewley Abbey, though
belonging to a later period. The limits of the map did not admit of the insertion
of Holywell Church, which might belong to the close of the eleventh century, nor
of the later church of S. Giles on the north, or of the twelfth century Abbey of
Oseney on the west. Accidentally the draughtsman has called S. Peter in the
Bailey 'S. Peter in the Castle ' ; but the form S. Petri ad Castrum is found.
CC 2
388 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the south side has not been ascertained, and therefore the shading has not
been inserted
The Castle Mill is shown at the west side of S. George's in the Castle,
but it has not been thought advisable to fix definitely any spot for the two
mills belonging to S. Kbbe's l.
The plan will show also how Oxford is naturally surrounded by streams
on the west, south, and east sides, illustrating what has been said on p. 118.
1 The draughtsman has accidentally omitted the Holywell Mill, though the
place was duly left on the river for its insertion in the north-eastern corner of the
map. Accidentally, too, the name of llythe Bridge has been omitted — namely,
where the road, which is a continuation westward of George Street, crosses the
first stream.
APPENDIX E.
Addenda et Corrigenda.
P. 19, line 25, /or grown up read been added; and line 35, /or § 1,
read §12.
P. 31, note 1, for MS. Lamb. 22 read C.C.C. Library, Cambridge MS.
cxxxiii. The Lambeth MS., to which the title Scala Cronica has been
applied, is not by Sir Thomas Gray.
Also for It has not been ascertained, &c. read Sir Thomas seems to
have written his work in or about 1355. It may be added that he used
Higden's Polychronicon largely in his compilation, and evidently derived
thence all his statements respecting King Alfred.
P. 43, note 2. The passage which first appeared in Savile's edition of
Ingulph (Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores post Be dam ; London, 1596, and
Francfort, i6oi,p. 903), making Ingulph a student at Oxford in the twelfth
century is as follows : — ' Ego enim Ingulphus, humilis magister Sancti
Guthlaci, Monasteriique sui Croilandensis natus in Anglia, et a parentibus
Anglicis, quippe urbis pulcherrimae Londoniarum pro Uteris addiscendis
in teneriori aetate constitutus, primum Westmonasterio, postmodum
Oxoniensi studio traditus eram. Cumque in Aristotele arripiendo supra
multos coaetaneos meos profecissem etiam Rhetoricam Tullii primam et
secundam talo tenus induebam.'
The form ' Oxoniensis,' the passing from Westminster up to Oxford, and
the reading of Cicero, all stamp it as a very late interpolation. The
passage occurs, however, in the Arundel MS. No. 178, which is said to have
been used by Savile ; but whether this be so or not, the MS. is not earlier
than the sixteenth century. The original MS. could not be found in 1680,
when Fulmer searched for it to print in his collection of historians (i.e.
the same as is commonly known as by Gale). There was an earlier tran-
script in the Cottonian Library, but that was burnt in 1731. All evidence,
therefore, which would show exactly what was in the original Croyland MS.
and what was interpolated has unfortunately been destroyed. Gale prints
the passage, but he admits he filled up from later editions, and the circum-
stances point to his having used Savile's edition for this passage, as he
implies it was wanting in the Margham MS. he used for the greater part.
P. 51, line 11, dele which.
P. 55, note 1, add Appendix A, § 22.
P. 82, line 2. Although JEglesborough is usually ascribed to Aylesbury, it
should be noted, perhaps, that there is a hamlet bearing the name of
Edelsborough lying somewhat higher up the Chiltern Hills to the north-
ward, and overlooking the line of the supposed Icknield Way. See Map.
390 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
P. 90, note 1, /or A, § 3, read §28.
P. 94, note 1, add Appendix A, § 30.
P. 95, note 4, deel De before Gcsta.
P. 97, nolo 1. With respect to the other instances of the name Alfgar
the following should be added: — In Dugdale (vol. iii. p. 192), under the
account of Coventry, a passage is printed with the title of * Genealogia
Fundatoris,' and with the reference to the MS. as follows: — 'Ad calcem
Florentii Wigorn. MS. penes Archiep. Armachanum an. 1649/ It has
the following: —
' 1. Leofricus comes Leicestriae, tempore Ethelbaldi regis Mereioruin
[716-55] genuit filium nomine Algarum, et tunc comes Lincoln, dictus
erat Egga. 2. Algarus primus, vel senior, tempore Offae [755-794],
Kenulfi [794-819], et Withlafi regum [825-838], genuit filium nomine
Algarum, et mortuus sepultus est apud Croyland. 3. Algarus secundus,
tempore Bernulfi et Burredi [838-852], regum Merciorum genuit
Leofricum secundum, et occisus est a Dan is Ungar et Ubba in Kesteven
apud Strekingham ; sepultus erat apud Croyland .... Algarus tertius,
tempore regis Edwardi [1041-1066], saepius exlegatur et toties strenu-
issime cum rege rcconciliatus, genuit Edwinum et Morcarum, postea
comites, et filium nomine Luciam postea comitissam.'
The summary, a few paragraphs later on, refers to events of King John's
reign, so the list must have been compiled after that date. No note, how-
ever, appears as to the date of the writing of the MS., or circumstances of
its insertion in the MS. of Florence of Worcester, which must have belonged
to Abp. Usher. Whether or not it is the one in Trinity College, Dublin,
MS. 602, has not been ascertained ; but that has a leaf of genealogies in-
serted. (See Hardy's Descriptive Catalogue, §c., Rolls Series, vol. ii. p. 1 30).
The internal evidence, however, seems to point to it being a compilation
of the thirteenth century. Algar Primus, however, who seems to have
lived on from Offa's reign into that of Withlaf (who came to the throne
in 825), would not fit the Algar of S. Frideswide's story, much less Algar
the Second, while Algar the Third is the Domesday Algar.
In Ingulph, also, mention is made of an Earl Algar who signalised himself
in fighting against the Danes when they wintered at Nottingham in 866
[i.e. 868 A.s.c.]. It is added in Ingulph's Chronicle that he was a warm
friend to the monastery of Croyland, and often visited the abbot, and a
charter is given, probably spurious, recording gifts made to Croyland.
[Gale's ed. p. 18]. The charter is in the name of Beorred, king of the
Mercians, and he grants at the request of Earl Algar certain lands. It also
confirms other lands, 'the gift of Earl Algar the elder,' his father, the charter
being dated 868. He fights the Danes in 870, and is killed in the skirmish.
The charter respecting the grant of the father is also given elsewhere in
Ingulph [p. 95], dated 810, and in the name of King Kenulph (Cenwulph).
It is impossible to say that all this is fictitious ; but, it would appear that
it is wholly on these charters and notes of Ingulph that the author of the
passage before-named, i.e. the 'Genealogia Fundatoris' based his state-
ments so far as they concern Algar.
APPENDIX E. 391
It is of course possible therefore that the compiler of the S. Frideswide
legend as it appears in the MS. of the twelfth century had heard of one or
both of these previous Algars, and introduced hence the name into his story,
although, as has been intimated, it was more likely, since his story relates
to Oxford, he took the Algar of Domesday.
P. 99, note 2, after Acta Sanctorum add October.
P. 102, at foot of page. Notes 1 and 2 should read as one note, belonging
to ref. 1. Note 3 belongs to ref. 2, and add as note 3, See ante, p. 97, note 1.
P. 107, line 27, for 773 read 733 (rightly printed in the line above).
P. 108, note 2. — It should have been added that, though Somerton is
now only a hamlet, the name was known in Saxon times, as it is referred
to in the Domesday Survey (folio 358 b, col. 2), as follows : — ' In Bodeby et
Sumertune habuerunt Aldene et Offerd 4 carucatas terrae.' It will be
observed that the spelling of the name in the Domesday Survey agrees
exactly with that given in the A. S. Chronicle, B, D, and F, viz. Sumertun
(A, has Sumurtun, and G and E Sumortun).
P. 117, line 3. — There is a later reference to the Lady of the Mercians
having built Bridgenorth, by Simeon of Durham under 1101, in recording
the siege of Bridgenorth by Henry the First. He refers to the 'Arx quam
in Occidentali Sabrinae fluminis plaga, in loco qui Bricge dicitur lingua
Saxonica Agelfleda Merciorum Domina quondam construxerat fratre suo
Edwardo seniore regnante V
P. 127. — The general question as to Alfred's sovereignty over Mercia
(and, therefore, Oxford) receives some illustration from the passage in
Asser, in which he speaks of the Welsh kings acknowledging the sovereignty
of iElfred to save them from the annoyance of their neighbours. He,
however, commences the paragraph with the following somewhat sweeping
statement: — ' Illo enim tempore, et multo ante, omnes regiones dexteralis
Britanniae partis ad iElfred regem partinebant, et adhuc pertinent.' He
then states that the Welsh king Hemeid, with the inhabitants of Demetia,
had, in consequence of the attacks of the six sons of Rotri, submitted
themselves to his sovereignty (regali se subdiderat imperio). That the
kings Howel and Gleguising, and Brochmail and Fernail, in consequence of
the attacks and tyranny of Earl Eadred (?) and of the Mercians, sought
him for their king, so that they might have protection from him against
their enemies. Also Helised and Anaraut, the latter abandoning the
friendship of the king of the Northumbrians. Asser adds that Anaraut
submitted himself with all his people to JElfred, to be obedient to the king's
will in all things, as iEthered was, together with the Mercians 2.
P. 138, line 19. — 'Of none of these (i.e. Bishops Alheard, Ceolwulf,
Winsy, and Oskytel) is there any mention in the chronicles.' This is not
quite accurate, inasmuch as in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, sub anno 897,
Alheard's death is mentioned. William of Malmesbury mentions ' Chenulph '
being made bishop over the Mercians, ad ci'vitatem Dorcestrae3 amongst
1 Simeon of Durham, De Gest. Regum, apud Twisden, D. S., col. 227.
2 Asser, Mon. Hist. Br. p. 488.
3 William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum, Eng. Hist. Soc, lib. ii, § 130, p. 204.
THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
the seven bishops who, according to the story, were appointed to fill
the vacant sees of the Gewissae in consequence of a letter from Pope
ForniOSUS. The original story is found inscribed on the lew blank leaves
which precede the .MS. known as the Leofric Missal; this was given
to the Cathedral of Exeter by Bishop Leofric (who died 1072), and is now
preserved in the Bodleian Library (MS. Bodlcy, 579). Though there are
difficulties in reconciling the dates, and the account of the transaction is
blundered, there is in all probability some basis for the story. The letter
must, however, have been written from Rome before 896 if Pope Formosus
had anything to do with it.
When speaking of Bp. Escwin — also more accurately, perhaps, written
JEscwig — it might have been added that in 992 King iEthelred committed
the forces to the leadership of an ealdorman, an earl, and two bishops, one
of the bishops being iEswig. Florence of Worcester, in compiling from
the chronicle, speaks of him as JEscwi ' Episcopus Lincolniensis,' evidently
forgetting that the see had not yet been transferred. On the authority of
Florence, also, the bishop assisted, together with Oswald archbishop of
York, at the consecration on November 8, 991, of the monastery of
Ramsey, in Huntingdonshire, which the archbishop and JEthelwine,
ealdorman of the East Angles, had built l.
P. 140. — The death of Bishop Sideman. One of the Abingdon chroniclers
(viz. in Claud., c. ix., lol. 1216) has practically the same passage, but
rather more concisely. It runs: — * De Sidemanno Episcopo. Anno tertio
hujus regis, concilio apud Kirtlincgtun Paschali tempore constituto, Side-
mannus, unus eorum qui intererant, Defnescire episcopus, subitanea
arreptus aegritudine ibidem defungitur. Cujus corpus, jussu regis ac
Dunstani archiepiscopi, Abbendonam defertur, et in porticu Sancti Pauli
apostoli illic decenter humaturV Probably each account was derived from
the same original source, as Chronicle B is supposed to have been compiled
at Abingdon.
P. 140. Two more incidents might have been referred to before the
close of the tenth century which have incidentally a connection with
Oxford. The first is so connected simply from the fact that Winsige, the
Reeve at Oxford (praepositus on Oxnaforda) is named, and this is probably
not the Reeve of the shire but the Reeve of the port or town. In one of
the Abingdon charters a curious story is found recited illustrating the strict
law existing as to burials. King iEthelred (c. a. D. 995) is made to say : —
' And how the present land came into my possession I will tell in a
brief story. Three brothers were stopping at a certain inn {con-vi'vio)
and their ' man,' whose name was Leofric, at the instigation of the
devil, stole a bridle. When it was discovered hidden in his bosom,
those who lost the bridle commenced pursuit, and the three brothers,
who were the thief's masters, also giving pursuit attacked in return the
pursuers. Two of the brothers, however, were killed in the affray, that
is to say JElfnoth and iElfric, but the third, Athelwin, together with the
aforesaid thief took refuge in S. Helen's Church [i.e. at Abingdon].
1 Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series, vol. i, p. 356.
APPENDIX E. 393
When the neighbours heard of the matter, Athelwig my praepositus of
Bucingaham, and Winsige my praepositus of Oxonaforda, buried the
aforesaid brothers amongst Christian folk. When therefore Earl
Leofsige heard this account he brought before me an accusation
against the two praepositi aforesaid, that the brothers who had been
slain were illegally buried amongst Christian folk. But being unwilling
that Athelwig should be vexed, since he was dear and precious to me,
I permitted both that those buried should rest where they were among
Christian folk, and I granted the aforesaid land (of Eardulfeslea) to him
in perpetual inheritance1.'
The last clause was necessary because it is presumed Athelwig's lands
were at the mercy of the king. Unfortunately, we have not the rest of
the story, and we are not told how Winsige, the Oxford praepositus, was
punished for his part in the illegal action. That the Reeve of Buckingham
and Oxford were concerned implies that the affray took place on the
northern side of the Thames, and that when two of the party were killed
the remaining two crossed the river and took refuge in S. Helen's, at
Abingdon.
The other story we obtain from a life of S. iEthelwold, Bishop of Win-
chester, who died a. d. 984 : the biographer's name was iElfric. This
iElfric was possibly the same who became Archbishop of Canterbury; but if
so, he must have written the biography immediately after his friend, iEthel-
wold's death, and before his promotion, as there is nothing in the biography
to imply that the author was an archbishop 2. We may therefore fix the
time of iEfelm's visit to Winchester very soon after 984. The story is
given as follows : —
' There was a certain c'vvis Oxnof omens is by name Aelfelm, who had
for many years been deprived of sight ; he was admonished in a dream
to go to the burial-place of S. Athelwold, and there was told to him
the name of a monk of Winchester, whom as yet he had never heard
of, who would lead him to the tomb of the holy Bishop. — What need
of many words ? He went to Winchester, and having called for the
monk by name, as he had learnt it in his dream (that is to say a
chanter of the name of Wulfstan) he asked him to become his con-
ductor to the tomb of the saint, and he told him the circumstances of
his vision. The monk then led him to the tomb of the saint blind, but
without any help of his conductor he returned able to see V
This may be looked upon in the light of a companion story to that
of the Monks of Evesham (see ante p. 218), as an example of the piety of
the people of Oxford.
P. 153. 1015. ' Swegen obliged the men of Oxford to obey his laws.' —
In connection with the promulgation of the laws of iEthelred's reign
1 Chron. Mon. Ab. Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 394.
2 iElfric was consecrated Bishop of Ramsbury in 990, and was translated to
Canterbury in 995. He died 1006.
3 Vita S. /Ethelwoldi, printed at the end of Chron. Mon. Ab., Rolls Series,
vol. ii. p. 266.
394 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
[978-1016], it might perhaps have been mentioned that two or three series
are supposed to have been promulgated daring that reign in the neighbour-
hood of Oxford, though not in Oxford itself. The title to the first runs: —
'This is the ordinance which King Ethelrcd and his witan ordained
as frith hot for the whole nation at Woodstock (act Wudestoce), in
the land of the Mercians according to the law of the English '.'
This series refers back to those which were made at a gemot at
1 Bromdun,' the place of which has not been identified. (Qy. Brondcne,
Hants, of Domesday, fol. 496, and so written in charters, or Brumdnn in
Dorsetshire, K. C. D. 1322.) Another series mentions only 'the agree-
ment made by Ethelrcd and his witan with the army that Anlaf and others
were with,' and which may perhaps be dated 993 2. A third series has the
following title : —
* These are the laws which King Ethelred and his witan have decreed
at Wantage (aet Wanetinge) as frith-bot V
These again refer back to the gemot at Bromdun, but so far as has been
observed there is nothing in their provisions which enables us to assign to
them a date. Another series is entitled, * Institutes of London,' and we
only have a Latin version of them. Another series has no place mentioned.
A sixth series, however, which appears to be very important, was promul-
gated at the ' Council of Enham V They begin: — ' These are the ordinances
which the councillorsof the English selected anddecreed, and strictly enjoined
that they should be observed.' The name of the place, from the similarity
of the sound, is supposed to be meant for Ensham. As is the case with the
others there is nothing in the laws themselves which confirms this interpre-
tation nor yet provides a date. It is unfortunate, since the series of laws
promulgated at Woodstock, Wantage, and possibly at Ensham, if we could
have ascertained their dates and circumstances, would throw further light
perhaps, not only upon the events which took place at Oxford in 1002,
1006, 1009, 1 01 3, and 1015, which have all been recorded in the previous
pages, but also upon the question of the obedience to Sweyn's law. In
those of Ensham we seem to obtain no insight at all into the gradual sub-
jugation of the English people to the foreign invaders, which was going
on. Law No. 33, for instance, runs : — 'And it will be prudent that every
year, immediately after Easter, ships of war be made ready.' The Danes
are not referred to except in one case, and that is (No. 37) in plotting
against the king's life, the man is liable in his own life ; 'and if he desire to
clear himself he may do so with the most solemn oath or with threefold
ordeal, by the law of the English ; and by the law of the Danes, according as
their law may be V It is difficult to conceive these laws being promulgated
so close to Oxford in the early part of the eleventh century, when we read
of the disasters which were befalling the Oxford district.
P. 159, line 11. — 'Rumour asperses Edric' William of Malmesbury
himself has more than once referred to the infamous character of Edric.
He thus writes: —
1 Thorpe's Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, 1840, vol. i. p. 280
3 Ibid. p. 2S5. •' Ibid. p. 293. ' [bid. p. 315. ' Ibid. p. 325.
APPENDIX E. 395
'Nam praeter Elfricum, Elferii, qui superiorem regem occiderat,
successorem, erat in talibus improbe idoneus Edricus, quern rex comi-
tatui Merciorum praefecerat ; faex hominum et dedecus Anglorum,
flagitiosus helluo, versuttis nebulo, cui nobilitas opes pepererat, lingua
et audacia cornparaverat 1.'
As it is hard to convey the force of the writer in an English version it is
given only in the original.
P. 172, line 2. — It should be noticed that, amongst the signatures
(p. 144) to the charter of foundation of S. Frideswide, the name of Bishop
iElfhelm of Dorchester is absent. This is very singular, since Oxford
was in his diocese. There is a brief account preserved of the second
Eadnoth, Bishop of Dorchester, namely, the one who, like his predecessor
jEscwig, was a warrior. In the Liber Eliensis, Thomas of Ely, writing about
1 150, and copying and extending what a certain Richard of Ely, a monk in
the same monastery, had collected some few years before him, devotes a
short chapter to Bishop Eadnoth. It seems that the bishop had been once a
monk belonging to Worcester, and had been made Abbot of Ramsey. While
here, a certain workman had a vision which he relates to the abbot, and the
result was, they discovered the body of St. Yvo and conveyed it to Ramsey.
Then he says that, the bishopric of Lincoln being vacant (the same error
which Florence of Worcester makes), Eadnoth was promoted to the see.
This must have been in 1008. On his promotion he is said to have built
and restored churches, amongst which that of Chateriz (i. e. in Cambridge-
shire) is mentioned. The Chronicler then describes his receiving the body
of S. iElfege at Greenwich. And then, in describing his death, he writes: —
' At length, however, when about to be honoured with a martyr's
glory, while he was saying mass, he was killed, in the battle which was
waged between King Edmund and Cnut at Assandun, as also was
Abbot Wlsi, by the Danes who accompanied Cnut ; and they first of
all cut off his right hand, on account of the [episcopal] ring, and then
mutilated his whole body. According to the Chronicle, they had
come hither to worship God rather than as soldiers to fight a battle V
P. 172, line 11. — Of Bishop iEthelric it should have been said that he was
a benefactor to Ramsey Abbey, and it is supposed he had been originally
a monk there 3, and if so, he would perhaps have been under Eadnoth, his
predecessor in the bishopric of Dorchester. From the Liber de Benefactoribus
S. Albani also we obtain the following: — ' Ethelredus episcopus Dork-
ceastre dedit Deo et Sancto Albano villam quae dicitur Cirstiwa, Cyncumba
Tiwa V
P. 173, line 9. — It was to Bishop Wulfwi that the bull issued by Pope
1 William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum, Eng. Hist. Soc, ed. London, 1840,
lib. ii. § 165, p. 266.
2 Liber Eliensis, Soc. Anglia Christiana, London, 1848, lib. ii. cap. lxxi. p. 188.
3 See Dugdale, vol. ii. p 547.
4 Printed from C. C. C. MS. VII. at end of Trokelowe's Chronicle in Chronica
Mon. S. Albani, Rolls Series, 1 866, p. 441 . The name is probably meant for Church
Tew — now Great Tew in Oxfordshire. See ante, p. 1 79, note 2, and p. 355, note 3.
.'//> THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Nicolas II., dated from the I.ateran, May 3, 106 r, was addressed concern-
ing the privileges of the see of Dorchester. The chief point at issue on
which an appeal seems to have been sent to Rome was the claim of the
Archbishop of York to the churches of Lincoln, Stowe, Newark, &c.T
P. 175, last linc,/or the two monks read the monk. And note 4: for
Appendix A, § 86, read § 68.
P. 189, line 10, to p. 190, line 6. — There should have been included
in the summary of the various accounts of William's march, that of the
local Chronicle of Oscncy known as Wyke's Chronicle (Annates Monastiri,
vol. iv. p. 7), which makes William go first to Winchester on his way to
London (see note 2, p. 188). The record or tradition of this would
explain perhaps why Florence of Worcester (see p. 187) has included
Southamptonshire amongst the counties ravaged by William during his
march (p. 197, note 1).
Although the evidence given makes it quite clear that there was no
authority for the reading of Oxonia in William of Malmesbury's History,
another argument might have been noted, namely, that in all cases when he
refers to Oxford, he uses the word Oxenefordum and Oxonenefordensis, never
Oxonia. Indeed it is doubtful if any writer so early as the twelfth century
ever uses Oxonia. This stamps both the passage of Asser (p. 46, and
p. 313) as a forgery, as well as that of Ingulph (p. 43, note 2, and p. 387).
See also Appendix B, p. 349.
P. 217, line 21. — Something more perhaps should have been added re-
specting Bishop Remigius, as his death took place before the close of the
century. The little, however, that is recorded of him does not directly
concern Oxford, since the see had been removed to Lincoln, and there is
no direct evidence of his even having visited Oxford. Henry of Huntingdon,
in speaking of the removal from Dorchester, writes thus in his Historia
Anglorum : —
' But since this bishoprick was larger than all others in England, and
extended from the Thames to the Humber, it seemed inconvenient to
the bishop that his episcopal seat should be situated at the extremity
of his diocese. It displeased him also that the town [of Dorchester]
was of small size, while in the same diocese the most noble city of
Lincoln appeared more worthy of the episcopal seat. Having there-
fore purchased some ground at the very summit of the city, next to
the Castle, which, with its exceedingly strong towers, commanded the
town, he built a church to the Virgin of virgins, strong, in a strong
position, fair, in a fair spot, and which was agreeable to those who
serve God, and also, as was needful at the time, impregnable to an
enemy Remigius indeed was small in stature, but great in heart;
dark as to complexion, but bright in deeds2.'
Again, when writing in 11 35 to his old friend Walter, he says: 'But I
speak only of what I have heard and seen ; I never saw him (i.e. Remigius),
but I have seen all the venerable clergy whom he first placed in his
1 The document is printed (apparently from a Lambeth MS.) inWilkins's Concilia,
London, 1737, vol. i. p. 315. In Mansi, vol. xix. p. S75.
'2 Henry of Huntingdon, Historia Anglorum, Rolls Scries, b. vi. § 41, p. 212.
APPENDIX E. 397
church1.' Henry of Huntingdon then enumerates them, and amongst
them he names the seven archdeacons whom Remigius appointed over the
seven counties. He mentions that over Oxford Alfred was appointed, and
to him there succeeded Walter, a splendid Rhetorician. Over Buckingham
he put ' Alfred the Little,' to whom succeeded Gilbert.
P. 241. — It might be useful to give the names of the several bishops who
held houses in Oxford in right of their see. Besides Remigius, Bishop of
Lincoln, there were Geoffrey, Bishop of Coutances ; Robert de Losinga,
Bishop of Hereford ; Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury ; Osbern, Bishop of
Exeter ; and Gilbert, Bishop of Lisieux.
P. 242. — In addition to the charter of Bishop Remigius might have been
given the charter of William Rufus respecting the gift of S. Ebbe's Church,
and the two mills to Ensham. It is given as an inspeximus on more than
one Patent roll, and the portion relating to Oxford runs as follows : —
' Insuper concedo, sicut pater meus concessit, Egnesham, cum
appendiciis suis, viz. Miltuna, Rollendriz, Erdentuna, Syfort, et
ecclesia sanctae iEbbae, cum adjacente ei terrula, et duobus molen-
dinis in Oxinefort, cum omnibus, consuetudinibus. Hiis aliisque
elemosinis abbatia in episcopali manerio constructa in dominio epi-
scoporum perhenniter maneat : has autem elemosinas omnes concedo
regali dono, tarn ecclesiarum, quam terrarum, sub ordinatione et dis-
positione Remigii episcopi, cujus interventu praedicta mater ecclesia
coepit fundari, ut ipse disponat et dividat, sicut sibi visum fuerit, inter
matrem ecclesiam suamque abbatiam ; in qua, viz. matre ecclesia,
canonici Deo servientes juste et catholice vivant, nullaque inter eos
praebenda ematur vel vendatur depulsa omni haeresi simoniaca V
The charter, it may be added, is dated 1090, that is, one year before the
confirmation charter of Remigius already given.
P. 247, line 9. — It maybe noted that Berenger of Todeni, of whom little ,
is known, was a benefactor to S. Alban's Abbey. In the Liber deBenefac-
toribus occurs the following : —
'Beryngerius de Toteneya et Albreda uxor ejus dederunt huic
ecclesiae Thorp et decimas de Siderynktone V
P. 257, note 2. — As an example of the name Manasses borne by a
Christian, might have been adduced that of Manasses de Arsi, a landowner
in Oxfordshire and a benefactor to S. Alban's*.
P. 258, line 8, for no reason to suppose, read no direct evidence.
P. 266, note 3, for Poeni, read Toeni.
P. 269, line 49. — Swetman the moneyer. It might perhaps have been
noticed in illustration of this name being found on coins, that there is an
1 Epistota De Contemptu Mundi, ibid. p. 302. Remigius, who had been conse-
crated to the see of Dorchester in 1067, died at Lincoln, May 7, 1092, the day
before his new cathedral was to be consecrated.
2 Printed in Dugdale, ed. 1846, vol. viii, p. 1270, from Patent Rolls, 8th Henry
VI, part 3, memb. 10.
3 Printed in Rolls Series at end of Trokelowe, Annates S. Albani, p. 445.
4 Ibid, p. 447.
398 THE EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD.
Interesting paper by the late Edward Hawkins, F.R.S., etc., in vol. xxvi. of
the Arcbaeologia (p. i) and reprinted in Eluding1. It gives an account of
a hoard of coins found at Beaworth in Hampshire, all of which were to be
attributed to William 1 or William 11. There appears to have been amongst
them 197 which were struck at Oxford, that is, having on the reverse the
letters oxi, OXNK, etc. Of these, ny had the name of the Domesday moneyer
on the reverse, spelt correctly on most, i.e. SPETMAN, but on live spelt
SIPETMAN ; and with the name of the place expressed 0X1, OXN, and OXNR.
There were also 64 which had on the reverse the name of BRIHTRED or
BRIHTRIED las many spelt in one way almost as in the other), together with
the place, expressed thus — oxe, oxx, OXNE, and oxsi. It will have been
perhaps observed that the name Brictred occurs in the Oxford Domesday
(ante, p. 225) ; while in the grant of houses given to Oseney at the foundation
in 1129 (p. 274) occurs the name of Brihtrec the moneyer as the tenant of
one of the houses so given. If Brihtred and Brihtrec are the same, the
coins may be those of the Domesday, and of the Oseney record, as the man
may well have lived into Henry I's reign.
In the same collection, also, there were 14 with the name of Wuhvi as
the moneyer, thus, pvlfpi-oxnef. It is singular that we find Wulwi named
in the Domesday Survey as the fisherman at Oxford (ante, p. 224), and
again so described amongst the tenants of the houses purchased by Abingdon
{ante, p. 264), and nowhere as a moneyer. On one coin, seemingly struck at
Oxford, the name of hakgod occurs. On the other hand, in the same list we
find the name of Eadvvin the moneyer, and in the Oseney list (ante, p. 274)
Godwine the moneyer, but, so far as has been observed, no coins have been
found with their name on the reverse, struck at Oxford. Examples are known
with the name of Eadwin, but they are struck either at Chichester or London.
Also of Godwine, but they are struck at Winchester and London.
P. 286, line 2. —For St. Aldae read St. Aldate.
P. 293, line 27. — The name Aldate. The only example of anything like
the name is found on the reverse of certain Sticas struck by the Northum-
brian king Eanred, c. 808. The letters which form the supposed name of
the moneyer read aldates (or atesald). The hoard in which they
occur was discovered in the, churchyard at Hexham in October 1832, the
total being estimated to have consisted of eight thousand specimens ; it
contained the coins of several kings of Northumbria and one or two Arch-
bishops of York, beginning with Eanred, who began to reign 808, to Arch-
bishop Vigmuna, who died in 854. It is thought the date of concealment
was 867. The name of Aldates occurs only amongst the moneyers of
Eanred, while the moneyers of that one king found in the collection
amount to some five and twenty names, with over sixty readings of those
names in all. The name Aldates not occurring elsewhere, no light can be
thrown upon it, and it has no various readings 2.
P. 296, note 5 (last but one on page). — For St. Budoc read St. Judoc.
1 Ruding's Annals of the Coinage of Great Britain, third ed. 1840, vol. i. p. X5I.
2 For a full account of the find, see Archacologia, vol. xxv. 1834, p. 279. The
paper is contributed by John Adarason, Esq.
INDEX.
Chiefly of Persons and Places.
Abingdon, coins dug up at, 60 ; Bridge
at, 218 ; district of, 85, 109, 115 ; on
map, 386.
— Abbey of, Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
compiled at, 124; S. Frideswide's
said to have been given to, 166-8 ;
extent of property round Oxford
early in the eleventh century, 168 ;
Bishop Sideman buried in (977),
140 ; site of the great church, ibid. ;
Robert D'Oilgi buried in (1090),
215 ; suits by, respecting tolls for
boats (c. 1060 and mi), 214, 267 ;
William the Conqueror and William
Rufus at, 303 ; Abbots of : see
^Ethelhelm, ^Ethelwin, .Ethelwold,
Ealdred, Faritius, Rainald, &c.
Abrincis, Hugh de, Earl of Chester
(Domesday), 224, 244-5.
^Egelmar, Bishop of Elmham, charter
(c. 1050), 197.
./Egelnoth (Abbot of Glastonbury) taken
by William to Normandy, 187.
^Egelwin, Bishop of Durham, prisoner
at Abingdon (c 1070), 204.
^Elfeah (Alphege),Bishop of Winchester,
signs charter (1004), 144-5 '■> after-
wards Archbishop of Canterbury,
martyred (1012), 152.
yElfgar, the Earl, succeeds Earl Leofric
in Northumbria (1057), 178; his
influence over the northern half of
the kingdom, 1 79 ; Oxford in his
earldom, 179 ; holds the land on the
north bank of Thames, 213 ; (Domes-
day bis), 223, 238 ; held Oxford,
226; the mill held by, 227; held
Odo's manors freely, 241. See also
Algar.
— the monk, sent from Canterbury,
attends on Harold (c. 1039), 175.
^Elfgifu, Emma, gives birth to Eadward
the Confessor at Islip, 177 ; sent to
Winchester (1036), 174; signs ^Ethel-
red's charter (1004), 144-5 > signs
Cnut's charter (1034), 165.
./Elfhelm, Bishop of Dorchester (c. 1002),
172 ; absence of signature, 395.
/Elfhere, ealdorman, expels the monks
(975), J39-
^Elfhun, Bishop of London, secures the
body of Archbishop Alphege, 152 ;
signs a charter (1004), 144-5.
Alfred, King, stated to be founder of
the University of Oxford, 1, 3, 13. 15,
16, 27, 39, 49 ; evidence from Ralph
Higden, Sir John Mandeville, and
the Scala Chronica, 30, 31 ; omis-
sion of fact in Asser's Biography, 39,
52 ; according to Camden does not
found, but restores the University, 51 ;
theory opposed by John Caius, 32 ;
said to be founder of the Great Hall
of the University, 26 ; letter to Bishop
of Worcester on grammar schools,
31 ; said to appoint three doctors to
three halls, 50 ; possessed no per-
sonal property north of the Thames,
51 ; born at Wantage, 130 ; at the
battle of .-Escesdun, 114; passage in
Asser relating to his sovereignty over
the West of England, 391 ; coins
struck at Oxford supposed to prove
his sovereignty, 366 ; varieties of
coins with his name, 368-73 ; his
title ' Rex Doro* on his coins, 372-4.
iElfred of Northumbria, coins attributed
to, 367-
— Archdeacon of Oxford, 396.
^Elfric, Archbishop of Canterbury, signs
a charter (1034), I^5 ; his will, 35,-; ;
previously Abbot of S. Alban's, ibid.
— the Ealdorman, feigns illness, 148 ;
slain at Assandun, 1^7.
^Elfstan (Alstan), Bishop of Wells,
signs a charter (1004), 144-5.
^Elfthryth, Eadward's stepmother, 137 ;
benefactress to Abingdon Abbey, ibid.
^Elfweard (Ethelward), Eadward's son,
dies at Oxford, 1 35 ; said to be versed
in literature, 136; and to have been
educated at Oxford, 49.
vEscesdun, country laid waste as far as
(661), 84; Offa extends Mercia as
far as (777), no; the Danes attempt
to reach, 114; battle of (871), ibid. ;
Danes succeed in reaching (1006),
148 ; shown on the map, 386.
^Escvvin, Bishop of Dorchester (c. 993),
I38> 392-
iEthelbald's rule in Mercia (716), 101,
107, 127.
400
INDEX.
yEthelburga, Abbess of Liming (633),
68.
/Ethelelm, Abbot of Abingdon (1071),
204, a 1 a,
iEthelflsed, lady of the Mercians, fortifies
Mercia, 116 ; death of (918), 125, 127,
132.
^Ethelmar, an ealdorman of Devonshire,
founds Ensham Abbey (1013), 170.
/Ethelnoth, Archbishop of Canterbury,
Bigns a charter (1034), J^5-
/Ethelicd, King, the Unready, orders the
Danes to be killed throughout the
kingdom (1002), 92, 94, 101, 141 ;
gives a charter to, and restores S.
Frideswide's, 91-3, 142-5, 166 ; gives
a charter to Knsham (1005 , 1 70.
— king of Wessex, at the battle of
/Escesdun (871), 114.
yKthelric, Bishop of Sherborne, signs a
charier (1004", 144-5.
— Bishop of Dorchester (1016), 172 ;
benefactor to Komney and to S. Al-
ban*s, 395.
yKthelstan, eldest son of Kadward, his
policy in Mercia (925-940), 137; said
to have had two mints at Oxford,
366.
— eldest son of /Kthelred, signs a
charter (1004), I44_5-
yEthelweard aids in the foundation of
Knsham, 170
iEthelwin, Abbot of Abingdon (1034),
165.
/Ethehvold, Abbot of Abingdon, after-
wards Bishop of Winchester, favours
the monks, 139; begs of King Kadgar
the monasteries, ibid. ; may have
turned out the secular canons from
S. Frideswide, 167 ; a pilgrimage to
his tomb from Oxford, 393.
yEthelwulf, the Berkshire Ealdorman,
114,115.
/Ethered, lord and under-king of the
Mercians, dies (912), 125.
yEtla, appointed to see of Dorchester
(680), 87.
Agelwin, Abbot of Ensham, 218.
Ailnoth's land at Oxford, 274.
Ailric (Domesday), 224, 267.
Akeman Street, 65, 68, 77, 383-4.
Akerman, Mr., excavations by, 78.
Albanactus made to fit Albania, 8.
Alberic, Earl (Domesday), 223, 239.
Albreda, wife of Berenger of Todeni,
397-
Albury, ' quae est in Oxenford, 228.
Alchester, Roman camp at, 66 ; MS.
account of, 77 ; Akeman Street at,
385.
Alcuin, said to have been at Cambridge,
14, 26 ; at Oxford. 60.
Aldgate suggested for Aldate, 294.
Aldith, wile of Robert D'Oilgi, 207.
Aldworth, Mr., Roman villa excavated
by, 78.
Aliwold, Bishop of Crediton, signs a
charter (1004;, 144-5.
Algar, ' Rex Keicestrensium,' and S.
Frideswide, 97, 103 ; various person!
bearing the name, 97, 388; an Earl
Algar temp. Buhred, 388. See /Edgar.
Algiva, matron, governess to S. Frides-
wide, 96.
Alheard, Bishop of Dorchester, 138, 391.
Allington, Wiltshire, battle at, m.
All Saints' Church, 285-6, 295.
Alward, of Seacourt, 99.
Alward (Domesday), 225, 269.
Alwi (Domesday) 225 bis, 260.
Alwi, or Alwin, Sheriff, 301.
Alwin (Domesday), 224 bis, 225, 266.
Alwin, the Rriesl (Domesday), 225, 266.
Alwine, held Odo s mansions freely, 241.
Arcisterium, a monastery, 92, 139.
Ardington (Aerdington, i. e. Varnton),
242, 243.
Aristotle's Well, Oxford, 58, 6i.
Armacan, Rd, (of Armagh), scholar of
University College, 55, 56.
Arthur, King, and Boso Ridocensis, 18 ;
his imaginary charter to Cambridge,
3».
Ashbury (Essebury), boundary of Offa's
conquest, 109; boundary between the
Wilsaite and Bearrucscire, J 09 -10.
Ashmolean Museum, antiquities in, 63,
64 ; line of city wall near, 238.
Asquesuffort (? Oxford), 350.
Assandun, battle at (1016), 157 ; Ead-
noth slain at, 395.
Asser, controversy respecting passage,
39, 47, 52 ; made to be first Regent
in grammar in Oxford, 45. See also
the Table of Contents and Index
Auctorum.
Aulus l'lautius, campaign of, 71, 73.
Axe, or Exe, various forms of, 352-3.
Axonevorde, battle of (571), 81, 82.
Aylesbury, battle of (571), 81, 82.
Bacgan-leah (Bagley), 169 ; road be-
neath, 121, 214.
Baldon, coins found at, 75.
Bampton, name for Bentonia, 104.
Barbury (Beran-burh), fighting at (556),
80.
Barking (Bercingis), monasteryat (677),
88; Eadwine and Morkere submit to
William at, 189.
Bartholomew (i. q. Partholaim), 35.
Bath taken (577), 82.
Battle Abbey manors in Oxfordshire,
243 ; the charter of, 185.
INDEX.
401
Bayeux, Bishop of. See Odo.
Bay worth, 169 ; road past, 215.
Beadanhead, battle at (6?$), 85.
Bearrucscire, 130, 133; boundary of,
no.
Beckley, Roman villa found at, 76.
Beda. made to study at Greeklade, 60 ;
at Oxford, 55, 56, 60 ; to found Grant-
chester, near Cambridge, 14.
Bedford, battle of (571), 82 ; on the
Danelaw boundary, 134 ; gained by
vEthelflsed, 134 ; burh built at, 132.
Belinus, made to build Billingsgate, 8.
Bellesitum, Belmount, Bellus Mons, 5,
6, 10, 17, 30, 32 ; road supposed to
pass, 67.
Bensington (Benson), battle of (571), 81;
battle of (777), 109.
Bentona, S. Frideswide reaches, 98,
103-4 5 tne miracle of the blind girl
at, 99.
Beorcham, William visits, 187 ; the
name of, 192.
Berengar. See Todeni.
Beri meadow, near Iffley, 169.
Berkamystede (Berstead, Kent; and
Bersted, Sussex), 192.
Berkhamstead (Beorhamstede), William
goes to (1066), 186; King William
and Lanfranc at (c. 1070), 192 ; medi-
eval castle at, 192 ; road past, to Lon-
don, 192 ; in Roman times, 385.
Berkshire Downs, view from the, 109.
Bernvald, the moneyer, on coins of
Alfred, 370-74, 381.
Berroc or bearc (Bearrucscire), 130.
Beverley, John of, scholar at Oxford,
55> 5656o; prior at Oxford (1333), 60.
Bicester, Roman road to, 65-6.
Binsey, road near, 68 ; supposed ford
at, ibid. ; near Wytham, 90, 103-5 ;
chosen by S. Frideswide, 90, 92 ; S.
Frideswide sojourns at, 98, 99 ; S.
Margaret's Well, 104; fanciful deri-
vation of name, 61.
Birinus, the missionary bishop, fixes his
see at Dorchester, 86.
Bladon Hill, camp on, 64.
Bladud, King, Stamford founded by, 60.
Bletchingdon, mansion belonging to
(Domesday), 224, 257.
Bloxham, Oxfordshire, mansion belong-
ing to, 223-39.
Bodleian Library, the Orsnaford coins
preserved at, 381. See also MSS. in,
under Index Auctorum.
Bolles (Bullingdon) granted to S. Frides-
wide's, 143.
Bomy, near Therouanne, supposed to
have been visited by S. Frideswide,
102.
Boso Devadoboum (Ridocensis), in King
Arthur's army, 18, 30; connected
with name of Ox, 19 ; commented on
by Twyne, 58.
Botley, Causey and Road, 69, 119, 214;
Mill, lawsuit about the, 2 14.
Brennius or Brennus, made to build
Bristol, 8.
Brictred (Domesday), 225, 268,398.
Bridgenorth, the burh built by yEthel-
flsed (912), 116, 391.
Bridges at Oxford, 215, 219, 274, 298.
Bridport, houses destructae, 234.
Brighthampton, excavations at, 64.
Brihtrec, moneyer, 274; coins with his
name, 39.
British Museum, Cuerdale coins at the,
Bromdun (?), laws promulgated at, 394.
Brutus, 7 ; made to fix on Greeklade,
11, 26.
Buckenham, Vice-Chancellor of Cam-
bridge, 34.
Buckingham, burh built at, 132.
Budoceus. See S. Budoc.
Buhred, King of Mercia, 131.
Bullingdon Green, mounds on, 64.
Bundi the Stallere, 271.
Burford (Beorghford), battle of (752),
108 ; mansions belonging to, 223, 239.
Busney, i. q. 'Binsey, 61.
Cadwallader, King, imaginary charter
granted to Cambridge by, 37.
Caerbossa, Oxford called, 5, 17, 19.
Caergrant, Cambridge called, 9, 37.
Caerleon, made by Rous and Dugdale
to be Warwick, 8.
Caer-memre, Oxford called, 5.
Caer Oxon, ditto, 30.
Caer-penu-hel-goit, i. e. Exonia, 30.
Caer Wise (Exeter), 353.
Caesar takes students from Cambridge
to Rome, 35 ; crosses the Thames, 70.
Caius, John, the Cambridge champion
in the Elizabethan controversy, 20.
Caius, Thomas, the Oxford champion
in the Elizabethan controversy, 20.
Caleva, name applied to Oxford, 16 ;
not Wallingford but Silchester, 66 ;
not mentioned by historical writers,
73-
Cambridge, founded by Ganteber, 9;
origin of, 24, 25 ; date of foundation,
28 ; Historiola or Cambridge Black
Book, 25, 26, 34 ; Elizabethan con-
troversy referring to the antiquity of,
9, 20, 39 ; speech of public orator at,
24 ; statement that Oxford borrowed
its most learned men from, 26 ;
houses at, vastae, 234.
Camden, story of the interpolation in
his edition of Asser, 40, 45.
Dd
402
INDEX.
Canditch, 237.
Cantaber, founder of Cambridge, 25,
( ante, river, 34.
Canterbury, Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
compiled at, 123; Lanfranc's and
Anselm's buildings at, 253; S. Mil-
dred's Church at -*<) ; Archbishop of,
see Theodore, ^Elfric, Stigand, Lan-
franc, &c.
Capitulo in, 215.
Carfax, 12 1-22, 275; market place at,
278; Port-mannimot at, 282. See
also S. Martin's at.
Cassibelaunus made to honour Cam-
bridge, 35.
Cassivelauui fines, 7 1 .
Castle, Oxford, the Mound, 117, 119;
associations, 162 ; Robert D'Oilgi's
building, 203 ; the site and plan, 219-
20 ; the view of, 276; the garrison,
283.
Catuwellani (Catyeuchlani), 71, 82.
Ceadwalla's grant to Abingdon, 89.
Ceawlin and Cutha, become masters of
the Thames river (568-71), 80.
Cedwalla, Grekelade schools instituted
by, 26.
Cenwalh of Wessex invades the Mercian
territory (661), 84.
Ceolwulf, Bishop of Dorchester (c. 896),
138, 39J-93-
Cerdic and Cynric, the landing and
march of, 80.
Chembrigia, daughter of King Gurgun-
tius, 35.
Chergrantium, name for Cambridge, 35.
Chertsey, monastery at, 88.
Cherwell, river protecting Oxford on
the east, 1 18-19; boundary of S.
Frideswide's property, 143.
Chester, Earl of. See Abrincis, Hugh de.
Cheyney Lane, once a high road, 08.
Chiltern Hills of Buckinghamshire,
natural eastern boundary of the
Dobuni, 71, 73 ; scene of battle (571),
81; over Wallingford (777), no;
the Danes pass over (1009), 150-51 ;
William supposed to march along
(1066), 192.
Cholsey ravaged by Danes (1006), 148.
Chorley Hurst, road beneath, 215.
Churn or Cern, the river, 71.
Cilia, foundress of a nunnery at Abing-
don, 89.
Cirencester, city of the Dobounoi, 71 ;
Roman road to, 65; name of, 72;
taken (577), 82 ; fighting at (628), 83.
Cissa, king in Wessex (c. 675), 89.
Civitas, Oxford so called, 275.
Claudius, campaign of (47), 71.
Clementine constitutions (131 1), 30.
Clewer, site of the old castle of Windsor,
205.
Clntterbnck, Rev. J. C, discoveries in
Dorchester dykes, 74.
Cnut lands at Sandwich (1016), 156;
victorious in Dorset and Wilts through
Eadric's treachery, 156; besieges
London and fails, 157 ; fights at
Gillingham, Sherston, Brentford,
Aylesford, and Assandun, 157; goes
to Gloucestershire, 157; holds a gemot
at Oxford (1018), 161 ; orders Eadwy
/Ethcling to be slain, 160; death at
Shaftesbury (1036), followed by a
gemot at Oxford to choose his suc-
cessor, 173; laws of, 279, 281.
Coleman (Domesday), 224, 264; his
house purchased, 264.
Columbanus, Abbot of Ensham, 242.
Confessio at S. Peter's, 251-2.
Corineus of Cornubia, 8.
Cornwealas, the, 130.
Corsham, Ethelred lies ill at, 156.
Corveiser, Henry, his land at Oxford,
274.
Coutances, Bishop of. See Geoffrey.
Cowley (Covele), granted to S. Frides-
wide, 143.
Creccanforda, now Crayford, 12.
Crespin. See Milo.
Cricklade, spellings of, n ; derivation
of ditto, 1 2 ; the Danes march west-
ward to, 116. For the story of the
Greek philosopher see Greeklade.
Crowland, Lincolnshire, Ingulph de-
scribes, 197; Orderic Vital there,
ibid. ; MS. of Ingulph's Chronicle
once preserved there, 387.
Cuddesdon, remains found at, 75.
Cuerdale, Lancashire, hoard of coins
found at, 369-79.
Cumnor Hill, flint weapons found on, 64.
Curci, Richard de (Domesday), 224, 247.
Cuthwulf fights the British (571). 81.
Cutslow, near Oxford, two hydes at,
granted to S. Frideswide's, 144, 165;
leased to Siward, 263.
Cwichelm, King of Wessex, extends his
kingdom up to Northumbria (626),
S3-
Cwichelmshlcewe, Danes reach (1006),
148-49; view from, 109-10; on the
map, 384.
Cynegils, the West-Saxon king, 86.
Damari, Gilbert of, gives a house to
Ensham, 243, 274.
Danes, early incursions of the, 113;
ravages of (in 993 similar to 832),
137; occupy East Anglia, 373. They
come through Hampshire again to
Reading and to Cwichelmshlcewe
INDEX.
403
(1006), 148 ; ravage Hampshire
(1009), 150; reach Oxford and burn
it (1009), 150; visit Oxfordshire
(ion), 151.
Defenascire, 130.
Denewulf, a herdsman, said to become
Doctor of Theology at Oxford and
Bishop of Winchester, 49.
Derby, one of the five burghs, 133 ;
gained by ^thelflsed, 134.
Dereman (Domesday bis), 224, 268.
Derewen (Domesday), 225, 269.
Derman the priest, his house purchased,
204.
Devadoboum. See Boso.
Didanus, a supposed king of Oxford, 91 ;
father of S. Erideswide, 92 ; a Mercian
king (or under-king), 95 ; death of, 97.
Diversoria; of roads, 19,310; of mo-
nastic buildings, 92, 319.
Dobuni, territory of the, on north of
Thames, 63, 71, 82.
D'Oilgi, Robert, builds Oxford Castle,
202-3 ; castle tower described, 254 ;
founds the church of S. George in the
Castle, 206-7 > S. George's Crypt de-
scribed, 254 ; of S. Mary Magdalen
Church, 250; possibly builder of S.
Peter's Crypt, 250 ; S. Peter's Crypt
described, 250-254; probably builds
S. Michael's Church, 216, 258; S.
Michael's tower described, 258-61 ;
referred to, 237 ; repairs at his own
cost the parish churches in Oxford,
215; list of churches built or re-
stored by, 215 ; builds Hythe bridge,
218; takes away King's mead from
Abingdon, 212; his dream, 213;
(Domesday), 224, 248; (Domesday),
225 ; holds houses belonging to
Steventon, 228; Constabularius and
governor of Oxford, 212, 304 ; aids
in building S. Mary's Church,** Abing-
don, 215; benefactor to Abingdon, 304.
— Nigel, succeeds to his brother Robert's
property, 304.
— Robert,the nephew, foundsOsney,203.
Domesday, date of the Survey, 222 ;
the Domboc, 280; account of, 383-
84.
Dorchester, on the north bank of the
Thames, fixed on as the see for Wessex,
86; Register of the Church of, 86;
but now lost, 171 ; possibly remains of
the early Cathedral Church there,
171 ; Bishop's seat removed from to
Lincoln, 171 (634-680), 86-7; Bi-
shops of (737-1002), 138 ; (1002-
1067), 172-3; Remigius Bishop of,
216, &c.
— camp at, 72 > Roman remains at,
74-
Dd
Dorchester (Dorset), houses destructae,
234-
Dornsoete, 130.
Doylybys, Barony of, 207.
Drake, John, gift of the Orsnaford coin
to the Bodleian Library, 369.
Droco of Audelys, 266.
Dunstable, near where the Icknield way
joins Wsetling Street, 385.
Dunwich (Dumnoc), Bishop Felix esta-
blishes his school at, 36.
Durham, William of, founder of Uni-
versity College, 52, 54.
Eadgar's law promulgated at Oxford
(1018), 161.
Eadgar child, at Berkhamstead, 186 ; at
Beorcham, 187; taken by William
to Normandy, 187; would have been
chosen king, 188.
Eadmund I, king, his policy in Mercia
(940-946), 137.
— Ironside, marries the wife of Sigeferth
(1015), 153-4; is chosen king (1016),
x57 > fights in several campaigns, 157 ;
his treaty at Olney, 158; his death
probably at Oxford on his way back
to London, 158-9 ; probably by
treachery, 158-9; is buried at Glas-
tonbury, 158.
Eadnoth I, Bishop of Dorchester (965),
138.
— II, Bishop of Dorchester, promoted to
the see (1008), 395 ; secures the body
of Archbishop Elphege, 152 ; fights
at battle of Assandun, and is slain
(1016), 172 ; his death and mutila-
tion, 395.
— Ill, Bishop of Dorchester, builds the
church of S. Mary at Stowe, connect-
ed with Ensham,T 72 ; dies (1049),^.
Eadred's policy in Mercia (946-955), 137.
Eadric the traitor, made ealdorman of
Mercia (1007), 150; accuses Wulf-
noth of treason, (1009), z'£.; n^s ev^
counsel, 150-52 ; murders the two
Danish thanes (1015), 153 ; this
event is confused by William of
Malmesbury with the massacre on
S. Brice's day, 146-7 ; prompts Cnut
to kill Uhtred, 156 ; his evil counsel
at Aylesford, 157 ; at Olney, 158 ;
Cnut reinstates him in the earldom of
Mercia (1017), 158, 160 ; rumoured
to have been beheaded by Cnut, 158 ;
slain in London (1017), 160 ; his
character, as drawn by William of
Malmesbury, 395.
— his son, who was monk at Abingdon,
266; (Domesday), 224, 266.
Eadward, the Confessor crowned (1043) f
2
4°4
INDEX.
176; his birth-place, ibid; dies
(1066), 184.
Eadward the Elder takes possession of
Oxford (91a), 125-6; fortifies MercU,
i_>5 ; and divides it into Shires, 132.
— the Martyr, murdered (979), 137.
— the Sheriff, 224, a [6, 301 ; of Salis-
bury, 246.
Eadwi, propositus of Oxford, 273, 302.
Eadwig /Eiheling slain by Cnut (1017),
160.
Eadwin, Earl, in Oxfordshire, 226.
Eadwiu the moneyer, his house pur-
chased, 264, 273 ; no coins found
bearing his name, 398.
Eadwine and his brother Morkere fight
against Earl Tostig (1065), 184;
appeal to Harold for help, ib. ; de-
sert Harold when he is lighting in
Wessex, 185; yield to Duke Wil-
liam without striking a blow, 193;
their treachery throughout, 199; said
to meet Duke William at Berkham-
stead, 186 ; at Beorcham, 187 ; said
to depart to Northumbria, 188 ; said
to submit to William at Barking, 189;
taken by William to Normandy, 187.
Eadwine, Sheriffs?) of Oxfordshire, 246.
Ealdred, Abbot of Abingdon, prisoner at
Wallingford (c. 1070), 204.
— Archbishop of York, at Berk-
hamstead, 186; at Beorcham, 187;
meets William at London, 188 ;
crowns William at Westminster
(Christmas, 1066), 187-8 ; crowns
Queen Matilda at Westminster
(1067), 196.
Earcongota, a nun (640), 87.
Ebrancus, made to be builder of York, 7.
Ecgbryht, succeeds to Wessex (800), and
extends his kingdom, ill.
Eddid (Domesday), 224, 267.
Edwacher's son, his land at Oxford, 274.
Edward, Edgar, &c. See Eadward,
Eadgar, &c.
Elizabeth, Queen, speech before at Cam-
bridge, 24.
Ellendun, battle of (823), in.
Elnod (Eadnoth), Bishop of Dorchester,
138. See Eadnoth.
Elphege, Elfhelm, Elfstan, Elfwin, Elf-
wold, &c. See /Elfeah, /Elfhelm,
yElfstan, /Elfwin, Alfwold, &c.
Emma. See A^lfgyfu.
Engeric, his land at Oxford, 274.
Englefield, Danes defeated at. 114.
Ensham, battle of, near Oxford (571),
81 ; Abbey founded at, 170 ; charters
relating to (1075), 242-3, 396 ; mills
at Oxford belonging to, 243, 299 ;
laws perhaps promulgated at, 394.
Eocce. Sec Ock.
Ermenold, land and house at Oxford,
274, 298 ; suit determined at Oxford,
274.
Ernnlph. See Hesding.
Erpwald, founds a school in East Anglia,
14.
Ethandune, battle of (878), 116.
Ethelburga, Ethelric, &c. See /Ethel-
burga, /Ethelric, &c.
Evans, Arthur J., remains discovered by,
at Woodeaton, 76; Roman villa ex-
cavated by, 78 ; Orsnaford coin in
possession of, 380.
Evesham, Abbey of (Domesday), 224,
241-2 ; the monks exhibit relics of
S. Egwin, 218.
Evreux, William, Earl of (Domesday),
224, 245.
Exeand Axe, places beginning with, 351.
Exeter, besieged by King Alfred (877),
28 ; gained by the Danes through
treachery (1003), 148 ; besieged
(1067), 196 ; house at, vastae, 234.
— Bishop of. See Osborn.
— college, line of old ditch near, 238.
Exincefort (Oxford), 350.
Exonia, transcribed Oxonia, 195-198.
Fairs, 278.
Faritius, Abbot of Abingdon (1100),
purchases houses in Oxford, 264 ;
leases house to Ermenold, 298.
Farndon, Eadweard dies at (924), 135.
Felix, Bishop, institutes a school in East
Anglia, 14, 36.
Fencott, Roman remains at, 77.
Feng (saisivit, suscepit), 128.
Ferrieres, Henry of (Domesday), 2 24, 245.
Fitz Nigel, William, gives his house at
Oxford to Ensham, 243, 274.
Five Burghs, the, 153, 155.
Flambard, Rannulph (Domesday) 224,
255 ; signs a charter as Rannulph
the Chaplain, 302.
Folly Bridge, the old Grand-pount, 120.
Fosse-way, the, 65.
Fountaine, Sir Andrew, his view that
ORS is an error for ox on the Orsna-
ford coins, 368-9.
Francis, Edmund, suits against Univer-
sity College, 54-7.
Frilford, Roman coffins found at, 78.
Fritheswitha, S. Frideswide, name so
spelt, 102 ; wife of Ethelward, king
of the West Saxons, 102.
Frithogith visits Rome (737), 102.
Fyfield. Berks, /Elfthryth's die at, 137 ;
Godric of, Sheriff of Berkshire, 245.
Ganteber, invented founder of Cam-
bridge, 9.
Gardens at Oxford. 249.
INDEX.
4°5
Gemot at Kirtlington (977), 140; at
Oxford (1018), 161 ; at Oxford (1036),
174; at Northampton (1065), 181;
finally at Oxford, ib.
— various kinds of, and laws relating
to, i. e. Hundred - gemot, Burh -
gemot, Shire-gemot, 279 ; Husteng,
Folkesmot, Wardmot, Portmannimot,
282.
Gernio. See Jernio.
Godfrey, Bishop of Coutances (Domes-
day), 224, 241.
— the Miller, his land at Oxford, 274.
Gifard, Walter (Domesday), 224, 256.
Gilbert, brother of Robert D'Oilgi, 207.
See Damari.
Gildas, made to go to Oxford, 46.
Githslepe. See Islip, 176.
Gloucester taken (577), 82 ; houses at,
vastae, 234 ; church of S. Aldate at,
293-
Goderun (Domesday), 225, 270.
Godestowe, near Binsey, 105.
Godric (Domesday), 225, 270; Sheriff
of Berks, 245, 270.
Godwine, Earl, rule over the West
Saxons entrusted to him, 174; be-
comes leader of the English party, 1 78.
— Bishop of Lichfield, signs a charter
(1004), 144-5.
— ealdorman,signs a charter (1034), 165.
— the Reeve of the town of Oxford
(c. 1050), 179; (Domesday, 1087)
bis, 225, 270, 303.
— his land at Oxford (c. 1129), 274.
— the moneyer, his land at Oxford, ib.
— Nicuma, his land at Oxford, ib.
Goldsmith, John, bequest of Oxford
property (1307), 53.
Goldwin (Domesday), 224, 268.
Gonwardby, Ph., holder of a tenement
in All Saints parish (1307), 53.
Grand-pont Bridge, 298.
Grandpount, or Folly Bridge, 120 ; pop-
ulation of district, 229 ; ponsmagnus,
299.
Granta Girviorum, i.e. Cambridge, 34.
Grantanus, son of Cantaber, 34.
Grantchester University , near Cambridge,
made to be founded by Bede, 14;
Cambridge called so, 9.
Grantinus builds the bridge at Cam-
bridge, 9.
Greek Hall, noted by Twyne, 58.
Greeklade, Greek University founded at,
h 3> 5> 6, 10, 13, 14, 16, 26, 27, 29,
32 ; story supported by Thomas
Caius, 27; attacked by John Caius,
31 ; imagined to be founded by Arch-
bishop Theodore, 61 ; Beda made to
study at, 61 ; perversion of the name
Cricklade, q.v., 21.
Greglade, Grekecolade, i. q. Greeklade.
Grimbald, S., made to be the first Pro-
fessor of Divinity in University of
Oxford, 45 ; supposed discord between
his disciples and the old scholars at
Oxford, 46.
Guarenfort, Duke William said to cross
the Thames at, 188.
Guimond, Prior of S. Frideswide's, ap-
pointed (11 20), 94.
Gurguntius Brabtru'c succeeds Brennius,
9 ; during his reign Cambridge found-
ed, 25.
Guthrum, fights at Chippenham, and
treaty made with (878), 116, 127;
the Peace and the Danish boundary,
134-
Gyrth, brother of Harold, possibly earl
over Oxfordshire, 1 79 ; charters ad-
dressed to, ib. ; killed near Hastings
(1066), 187, 199.
Hagae, 228, 235.
Hampton, mansions belonging to
(Domesday), Oxfordshire, 224, 257.
Hamtunshire. 129.
Harding of Oxford, benefactor to S.
Ebbe's Church, 243, 267.
— (Domesday), 224, 266.
— the priest, court held in the house of
(mi), 267.
Hargod the moneyer, 398.
Harkirk, discovery of coins at, 367.
Harold Harefoot chosen king (1036),
1 74 ; when lying ill at Oxford is
visited by Lyfing, Bishop of Crediton,
175 ; dies at Oxford (1039), ^-
— Earl, passes Oxford on his Welsh
expedition (1063), 180-1 ; at the
Gemot in Oxford (1065), 181 ; sacri-
fices his brother to political expe-
diency, 182 ; allows Cnut's law to be
renewed, 183 ; surrenders to Earls
Eadwin and Morkere the whole of
the north of England, 193 ; elected
king, Jan. 1066, 184 ; hastens to help
Eadwine and Morkere, 185.
— Hardrada, invades England, 184.
Harthacnut succeeds Harold Harefoot
(1039), I765 dies (io42)> I76-
Hastings, William lands near, 187.
Headington, Roman roads near, 66, 6*j.
Hean the ' patrician,' founder of Abing-
don, 89.
Hedington, granted to S. Frideswide's,
H3-4-
Heiu, the first Northumbrian nun, 88.
Helenstave, a nunnery on the Thames,
90.
Henry. See Ferrieres, Corveiser, &c.
Hereford, Bishop of. See Robert.
Hertford, burh built at, 132.
406
INDEX.
Ilesding, Ernulph of (Domesday), 224-
246.
Hincksey, held by Abingdon, 169 ; land
near, 213.
Holton, remains found at, 75.
Holywell, the manor of, held by Robert
DrOflgi, 225; two hydes there held
1 \ S. Peter's Church, ib.\ church of,
possibly erected by Robert D'Oilgi,
297 ; mill of, 225, 249, 399.
Holy Trinity, Chapel of the, 286, 295.
Honorius, Pope, charter to Cambridge,
dated (624), 38.
Horscfcrth, &c, in Domesday, 378.
Hospitatac domi, 249.
Ilourdcs, 210, 259.
Hugh. See Abrincis.
lluiccas, the, 129, 131.
I lumber, Rouse invents the origin of the
name, 8 ; Mercia extended to the,
108.
Huntingdon, the burh at, 133 ; houses
at, vastae, 234; Henry of, has heard
old people speak of S. Price's mas-
sacre. 147.
Husteng&aA Hustengs Court, 282.
Hyde, Thomas, attests Wood's copy of
Twyne's statement, 43.
Hythe bridge built by Robert D'Oilgi,
215, 219, 298.
Hythe,the, and Hythe Bridge, 218, 219.
Ickleton way, same as Icknield, 70,
Icknield way along the top of the
Berkshire range of hills, 70, no;
supposed to be trodden by William
the Conqueror, 192 ; joins the Wset-
ling Street, 385.
Ine, king of Wessex (678), 85, 89, 101,
107.
Ingulph, said to have been a student at
Oxford, 389.
Iren, made to be Icen, or Oxford, 60.
Isis, the name of the Thames near
Oxford, 362-3 ; derived from glacies,
59; 'Isidis ad vadum,' &c. and 'ad
ripas,' name for Oxford, 16.
Islip (Githslepe), birthplace of Eadward
the Confessor, 176.
Ithamar, Bishop of Rochester (644),
educated in Britain, 36.
Ivry, Robert of (Domesday), 224, 255 ;
with Robert D'Oilgi founds S. George
in the Castle, 206-9.
Jacet etjacuit , 238-9.
Jernio (Gernio) Domesday, 224, 257.
Jerusalem, Oxford like, 5.
John, the monk of S. David's, made to
be Reader in Logic, 45.
Judoc, §., relics of, at S. Evroult and at
Winchester, 296-7.
Kamber, whence Cambria, 8.
Kennington, road near, 121, 214; land
at, held by Abingdon, 169.
Kentigern made to go to Oxford, 46.
Key, or Keys. See Caius
Kidlington, Roman remains found at,
76 ; leased to Siward, 263.
King's mead, Abingdon deprived of,
213, 283.
King's Mill, supposed road near, 67.
King's peace, the, -'So.
Kingston Bagpoize, Berks, 245.
Kirklade (Greeklade), 14.
Kyrtlingtun, the council at, 140, 392.
Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury
(.Domesday), 223, 240; at Berkham-
stead, 192.
Latinelade, Lechlade called, 14.
Laws: promulgated near Oxford, in
^Ethelred's reign, 794 ; mention of
the Danes in the laws, ib. ; Cnut's,
renewed (1065), 181, 183 ; 279, 281 ;
Eadgar's (1018), 161, 330; Sweyn's
law, (1013), 184 ; repair of the burh,
236 ; promulgated at Oxford and
written in the Domesday Survey,
280.
Lechlade, Latin University founded at,
14, 16 ; derivation of name, 15.
Leicester, one of the five burhs, 133;
the Danish army at, ib. ; gained by
yEthelflsed, 134; Diocese of, joined
to Lindsey, 138; Bishops of, ib.
Bishop's seat at, 171.
Lenborough, battle of (571), 82.
Leofric, Abbot of S. Alban's (1006), 355.
— ealdorman, signs a charter (1034),
165.
— Earl, succeeded by his son ^Elf-
gar (1057), 178 ; Oxford in his earl-
dom, 179.
Leofstan, Abbot of S. Alban's, obtains
Tew (c. 105 1 ), 179; makes a road
through Chiltern, 151.
Leofwine, brother of Harold, slain in
the battle near Hastings, 187, 199.
— Bishop of Leicester (c. 960), 138.
— Budda, holds land in Oxford, 274.
— Claudus, holds land at Oxford, 274.
— the fisherman at Bentonia, healed by
S. Frideswide, 100.
Leveva (Domesday), 224, 225, 267.
Levric (Domesday), 225, 269.
Lincoln, within the Danish lines, 133 ;
slaughter at (1065), l$2 '■> houses at,
vastae, 234; King William goes to,
196 ; chosen by Remigius for his see,
216; partly perhaps because within
the Dane law, 216 ; Bishop of. See
Remigius.
INDEX.
407
Littlemore, Roman pottery works dis-
covered, 75.
Locrinus, whence Loegria, 8.
Lodowin (Domesday), 225.
London, ' set in order' by yElfred, 127 ;
Eadward takes possession of, 116;
given to Eadward, 132 ; S. Mildred's
Church at, 2 89 ; Bishop of, see iElf-
hun.
Lowbury, site of the Danish camp, 115.
Lucius,King, connection withCambridge,
37, 38 ; story of Lucius evidently ac-
cepted by the Abingdon Chronicler,
294.
Lyfing, Bishop of Credition, visits Harold
Harefoot in Oxford, 175 ; instrumen-
tal in raising Eadward the Confessor
to the throne, 178.
Lyford, S. Martin's Church at Carfax
built in connection with, 164.
Lygean, name of the River Lee, 82.
Magdan (Maddan), father of Mempric,
5,7-
Maldon, Eadward builds the burh at,
(920), 134.
Maledoctus, Roger, his house purchased,
264, 273.
Malmesbury, Sigeferth's widow taken to,
153-5-
■ — William of, sees the charter at S.
Frideswide's, 93 ; his error in copying
the charter, 146.
Malun (Malim), brother of Mempric,
5,7-
Manasses, the son of (Domesday), 224,
257-
— de Arsi, a landowner in Oxfordshire,
395-
Manors, distribution of, 271-2.
Mansiones and Domus, 170, 227, 235-6 ;
' hospitatae] 249; mansiunculi, 170;
held by ' tenentes in capite,' 238, 271.
Market place, 278.
Marston, Roman road near, 68.
Masters, William, Public Orator, 24.
Medeshampstead (i.e. Peterborough) de-
vasted by the Danes (870), 114.
Medley, near Binsey, 105.
Melkinus at Oxford, 46.
Mempric, supposed builder of Oxford,
h 3> 5» 7> 10, 16.
Meonwara, the, 129.
Mercia, bounded on the south by the
Thames (c. 626), 83 ; extended up
to Northumbria under Penda (c. 650),
83 ; Wulhere extends the kingdom
to yEscesdun (661), 84; invaded by
Cenwalh (661), ib. ; extended to the
Isle of Wight (675), ib. ; the Thames
again the southern boundary (700),
85 ; extended to the Humber (733), '
108 ; Cuthred invades the kingdom as
far as Burford (752), 108; the king-
dom again extended as far as iEsces-
dun by Offa (777), 109 ; but even-
tually becomes subject to Ecgbryht
(827), in.
Merlin, prophecy of, 60.
Mills at Oxford (Castle), 163, 223, 227,
243, 276, 299; (S. Ebbe's), 299;
(Trill Mill), 299.
Milo Crespin (Domesday), 224, 244,
247 ; at Abingdon, 303.
Mint at Oxford, 366 ; moneyers, 225,
268, 274, 379, 397.
Alonasteriolum, 164, 292.
Monks, expulsion of, and introduction
of seculars, 139.
Mont de Juis, 163, 276.
Moreton, Earl of (^Domesday), 224, 244.
Morkere, Earl, son of ^Elfgar, elected
earl of Mercia, 180 ; leader of the
revolt, 1 83. See Eadwin and Morkere ;
also Sigeferth and Morkere.
Moseley, Professor, Roman villa exca-
vated by, 78.
Moulsford,the Icknield way reaches, 386.
Murus, 236.
Name of Oxford, 348-365.
Nennius, said to come to Oxford, 46.
Neot, S., King Alfred said to have
founded Oxford by counsel of, 47,
48, 50 ; first Regent in Divinity, 45 ;
life of, does not mention Oxford, 28.
Netelton, supposed to borrow MS. of
Asser, 43.
Nettlebed, neighbourhood of (571), 81.
Nigel, brother of Robert D'Oilgi, 207.
Northampton, the Danish army leaves,
133; Gemot at (1065), 181, 200;
houses vastae, 234.
Northleigh, Roman villa at, 77.
Northumbria (1066) at the mercy of
Harold Hardrada, and Tostig, 185.
Nottingham one of the five burns, 133 ;
King William marches to (1067), 196.
Nuns established in the country, 87 ; at
Abingdon, 89 ; taken away from S.
Frideswide's, 138.
Ock river, the (Eocce), 363-4.
Oddington, Roman pottery found at, 76.
Odelina, wife of Roger Maledoctus, 273.
Offa, king, takes Benesington, 109.
Odo, Bishop of Bayeux (Domesday),
223, 240.
Olaf, Northumbria, revolts (943), I37«
Olaney, in Gloucestershire, treaty at,
(1016), 158.
Ora, value of the, 226.
Orbyrht, Bishop of South Saxons, signs
a charter (1004), 144-5.
4oS
INDEX.
( >rsnaford coins supposed to be struck
at Oxford, Appendix C. 366-382.
Osanig or Ox hey, Herts, 355.
Osanlea, name of a place, 356.
Osbom, Bishop of Exeter, has manors
in Oxfordshire, 241.
Oseand< hise, places beginning with, 355.
Oseney Abbey, founded (1129), 211,
283 ; suit with the Warden of Uni-
versity Hall (1427), 59; monk of,
copied charter of S. Frideswide, 93 ;
reference to MS. at, 1 2 ; name bearing
on origin of name of Oxford, 354,
359-60 ; written in a charter Oxanee,
359-
Osgar, supposed Bishop of Lincoln,
96-7.
Oskytel, Suffragan Bishop of Dorches-
ter (949), 138.
Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury, has manors
in Oxfordshire, 241.
Oswald of Northumbria stands god-
father to Cynegils at Dorchester, 86.
Oswerdof Ilergerdesham attends Harold
at Oxford, 175.
Ouse river, the Dane law boundary, 134 ;
name of, and notes on, 357, 360-1.
Ox or Oxen, places beginning with, 350.
Oxenchester, supposed name of Oxford,
3°'
Oxenford (in Surrey), 351.
Oxford. For references to events at
Oxford see the Table of Contents at
the beginning of the volume. For
origin of name of Oxford see Appen-
dix B.
Oxfordshire, Bishop of, 173; the ' Te-
nentes in capite,' 382, and Frontis-
piece.
Oxhey, Hertfordshire, land at, 356.
Oxonage or Osanig, 355.
Oxonia, Oxford called, 5; 46, 313;
I95-98; 389; 396-
Partholoim, brother of Ganteber, founder
of Cambridge, 9.
Penda, king of Mercia, Greeklade schools
said to be instituted under, 26 ; rules
over the Mercian kingdom, 83.
Peter, sheriff of Oxfordshire, 273, 302.
Peterborough, Anglo - Saxon Chronicle
compiled at, 124.
Pevrel, William, 224, 245.
Philip of Spain, letter to (1544) ac-
knowledging Cantaber founder of Cam-
bridge, 25.
Phillips, Professor, flint implement found
by, 64.
Plaga, 215.
Plegmund, Archbishop of Canterbury,
coins of, 374.
Pontesbury, battle at (661), 84.
Population of Oxford, &c, 229-33.
Porlicus, 140.
Portmannimot, 28 2.
Port meadow, 68, 70, 300.
Port Street on the north of Oxford, 121,
M3-
Portu ay, beneath the Berkshire hills, 70.
Prcediohim, 164.
Propositus, Godwin, 179, Eadwi, 302,
347; Winsige, 393-
Preaux, Abbey of, manors in Oxford-
shire, 243.
Preston, Kent, S. Mildred's Church, 289.
Radley, road near, 121.
Rainald, Abbot of Abingdon, 302.
Ralph (William), the baker, his land at
Oxford, 274.
— or Rannulph. See Flambard.
Ravenig's land at Oxford, 274.
Reading, the Danes arrive at, 1 14.
Reeve. See Propositus for Port-reeve,
and Sheriff for Shire-reeve.
Reimund, his land at Oxford, 274.
Reinbodcurth, Wido of (Domesday),
224, 256.
Remigius, Bishop, monks of Ensham
to be subject to him, 242 ; rewarded
by William with the Bishoprick of
Dorchester, 216 ; said to have given
him a ship, ib.\ removes see from Dor-
chester to Lincoln, 216; but date of
translation doubtful, 217; William's
reasons for removal of the see, 217;
the Bishop's reasons according to
Henry of Huntingdon, 396 ; Bishop
of Lincoln (Domesday), 224, 241 ;
title Dorcensis sive Lincolnicnsis, 217.
Rewley (De Regali Loco), 17.
Ribble river, coins found on the bank
near Cuerdale, 376.
Ridohen or Rhyd-ychen, mythical name
of Oxford, 5, 17, 19, 30, 58 ; accepted
as a real name, 364.
Risborough, Buckinghamshire, mansion
belonging to, 223, 239.
River communication, 214, 267.
Robert. See D'Oilgi, &c.
Robert, Bishop of Hereford (Domesday),
224, 241.
Rochester, crypt at, 253-4.
Roger. See Ivry, Maledoctus, &c.
Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, Chancellor
(11 22), 95.
Rolleston, Dr., excavations by, 78.
Rome, English school at, 28, 33.
Rous, in his youth a scholar at Oxford,
12.
Ruald, his house purchased, 264, 273.
Runcorn, the fortress at, 117.
Rythrenan, the, 182-3, 200.
INDEX.
409
Sabren or Sabrina, whence river called
Severn, 8.
Schola or Scholse, 29.
Sextary, measure of the, 227.
Sheriffs : — Eadward, 242, 246, 340,
345 ; Eadwine, 246 ; Alwi, 257, 266 ;
Sawold, 270; Peter, 273; Suain,
384; summary, 301.
Shires, origin of the, 129.
Siege of Oxford in 1066, supposed, 193,
194, 195, 199, 200.
S. Aebba, Church of, connected with
Ensham, 170, 242 ; (Domesday), 284,
295 ; mills belonging to, 299.
S. Aldate, Church of, in Oxford, 286,
291; the mythical Eldad, 291, 294;
name 'Aldates' on Sticas found at
Hexham, 398 ; church at Gloucester,
so named, 294 ; story of church
being obtained by S. Frideswide, 168,
292.
— Parish, population of, 231-2.
S. Briavel's, origin of name, 294.
S. Brice's day, the massacre on (1002),
92, 141, 147.
S. Budoc, a Cornish saint, 296 ; church
of, at Oxford, ib.
S. Clement, chapel of, 286-7, 295-
S. Denys, Abbey of, holds Teynton,
241, 243.
S. Ebbe. See S. Aebba.
S. Edmund's, Abbey of (Domesday),
224, 241, 244 ; coins with the name
probably struck there, 373.
S. Edward, Church of, 286, 290.
S. Egwin, relics of, exhibited, 218.
S. Frewisse, 102.
S. Frideswide, becomes a nun, 92 ;
despises marriage, 94 ; selects Binsey,
90 ; flees to a wood, 94 ; besought
by messengers to restore sight to the
king, ib. ; her body reposes in Oxford,
92, 94 ; life of, 92-95.
— Church of, Danes take refuge in, 92,
142 ; charter of King ^Ethelred to
(1004), 142 ; signatures to the same,
144 ; lands of, and their boundaries,
143, 262; nuns taken away, • secular
canons introduced, 92, 138 ; secular
canons driven out, 166 ; according to
a Rochester MS. (1049) canons intro-
duced, 168 ; said with its possessions
to be given to Abingdon, 166 ; no
chronicle kept at, 202 ; canons of,
show no signs of activity till close of
eleventh century, 217 ; lay claim to
S. Mary Magdalen Church, 212 ; the
monks (according to Thierry) take
up arms against the Conqueror, 195 ;
(Domesday), 224, 261 ; the church,
284 ; tower of, 148.
S. George, Church of, in the Castle,
founded, 206-7, 284; remains of, 210;
crypt in the Castle, 254 ; Droco of
Andelys, a benefactor to, 266.
S. Giles, supposed ancient site of the
University, 6, 13, 58 ; churches dedi-
cated to, 209.
S.John (Thomas), house at Oxford, 274.
S. Martin's Church, Carfax, 121, 164-5,
284.
S. Mary Magdalen Church founded,
207-9, 2^4-
S. Mary's Church (Domesday), 223,
239, 284 ; the principal church, 6, 13,
S. Michael's, Priests of (Domesday),
224, 258.
— Church and Tower, 258-261, 284-5 5
line of old ditch near, 238.
S. Michael, ' ad Portam Australem,'
church of, 286, 295.
S. Mildred, account of, 287.
— Church, 285-6, 289.
S. Peter ad castrum, church of, 286,
295.
S. Peter's-in-the-East (Domesday), 225,
284; probably built by Robert
D'Oilgi, 250 ; the crypt, 250, 254.
S. Walery, Barony of, 207.
Salisbury, Bishop of. See Osmund.
Sarum, Old, fighting at (552), 80.
Saulf of Oxford, 273.
Savile, Sir Henry, supposed author of
passage in Asser, 43 ; his edition of
Ingulph, 389.
Sawold (Domesday), 225, 270.
— Sheriff, 301.
Scholastica, S., the day of the Oxford
riot in (1354). 13-
Seacourt (Seckworth), road to, 68, 69,
169 ; law suit as to Botley Mill, 214.
Sefrida or Safrida, wife of Didan, 96.
Segrim (Domesday bis), 224, 225, 268.
— By wall, his land at Oxford, 274.
Senlac, a name given to the battle place
near Hastings, 185.
Sergius, Pope, imaginary charter to
Cambridge, dated (689), 35.
Sewi (Domesday), 224, 269.
Shaftesbury, houses vastae, 234.
Shipton, Oxfordshire, mansions belong-
ing to, 223, 239.
Shire ditch, the, 105-6, 118.
Shotover Hill, flint weapons found on,
64 ; remains found near, 75 ; road
across, 68, 215 ; derivation of name,
348.
Sideman, Bishop, sudden death at
Kyrtlingtun (977), 140, 392.
Sigbert, King, said to be founder of
Cambridge University, 25, 36, 37.
Sigeferth and Morkere, thanes of the
Seven Burghs, treacherously slain at
Oxford (1015), 153.
4io
INDEX.
Silchester. Roman road past, 65. 3S6.
Sinodun, kept in check by Dorchester,
:.
Siward, a monk from Glastonbury, 165.
4 w and kidlinglon leased to,
Speen. Roman road past, 65. 385.
Sjpracbeling [Domesday), 224, 266.
Stafford, burh built at, 132.
Staines. Roman road past, 65.
Stamford, story of the University being
moved to, 50, 60.
Stigand, Archbishop of Canterbury,
meets William at London, 1^8 ; with
other magnates discuss at London
who should be king, 188 ; submits to
William at Guarenfort, 188; taken
by William to Normandy, 187.
Stonesfield, Roman villa at, 77.
Stowe in Lincolnshire connected with
Ensham, 170, 241.
Streatley, haga belonging to, 228; Ick-
nield way leads to, 386.
Stud him, 34.
Swain, sheriff, 301.
Sumersajte, 129-30.
Sumurtun, the battle of, 107 ; mentioned
in Domesday, 391.
Suthrige, or Surrey, 1 30.
Sweting Cadica, his land at Oxford,
274.
Swetman, the moneyer, 225 ; further
examples of his name on the coins of
William the Conqueror, 397.
— 224, 225.
— (another), 225, 268.
Sweyn comes to Oxford, 152 ; the men
of Oxford and Winchester submit to
his laws, 153.
Tadmarton, house in Oxford belonging
to, 297.
Tarn, places with affix, 358.
Tamise-ford (Tempsford), 361.
Tamworth, Northumbrian attack on,
137; same kind of mound as at
Oxford, 117, 204.
Taunton, given by Queen Fritheswitha,
102.
Tempsford, Danes go to, 152; written
Tam-ese-ford, 360.
Teynton, held by S. Edmund, 224, 241,
244 ; held by S. Denys, 241, 243.
Tew (Oxfordshire), granted to S. Alban's,
I79> 355, 394-
Thame, River, boundary of the Dobuni,
71, 73; boundary of S. Frideswide's
property, 143, 361 ; name of, 358.
Thames, raids of the I )anes up the, 1 14 ;
southern boundary of Mercia (626),
83 ; ceases to be the boundary of
Wessex (611), 84 ; south boundary of
Oxfordshire, 133 ; S. Frideswide takes
a boat upon the, os ; church of S.
Mary (i.e. S. Frideswide) on the
banks of, 101 ; navigation of the, 314;
name of. and notes on, 357 S. //>_>.
Thancred, the monk, attends on Harold,
Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury,
made to found Grekeladc, 60.
Thomas, Rev. Vaughan, excavations at
Wytham, 64.
Thomas. Sec S. John.
Thoresby, Ralph, notes on the Orsna-
ford coins, ,y>s.
Thorkell's army ravages Oxford, 155.
Thornebirie, afterwards called Binsey,
92, 98.
Thurkill with his army attacks Lon-
don (1009), 150.
Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester, co-scholar
with Rous at Oxford, 12.
Todeni, Berengar of (Domesday), 224,
247 ; a benefactor to S. Alban's Abbey,
397-
Tostig, earldom bestowed by Eadward
(1055), 179 ; expedition against King
Gruffydd (1063), 179; deposed and
outlawed (1065), 180-81 ; his house-
hold men slain, 181, 200 ; comes over
to England with a fleet, 184.
Towcester, Eadward makes burh at, 1 34.
Trill Mill stream, 118, 299.
Twyford, Bucks, mansion belonging to,
223,239.
Twyne, Bryan, takes up the case for
Oxford after the death of Thomas
Caius, 37 ; interviews Camden, 1622,
in respect of the Asser passage, 44.
Uhtred yields to Cnut, as he had done to
Sweyn, and is slain by him, 156.
Uffmgton, probably Oflantune, in.
Ulf, Bishop, succeeds Eadnoth at Dor-
chester (1050), 172 ; at the synod of
Vercelli, ib.
Ulfkytel resists the Danes (1004), 148 ;
overpowered by the Danes(ioio), 151.
Ulmar (Domesday), 225, 270.
Ulric of Oxenford, 270.
University College, the foundation of, by
WTilliam of Durham (1249), 52 ; the
purchase of houses (1253-62), 52;
made by Rous into the three halls
founded by Alfred, 52 ; the lawsuits
(1363), 78, 52, 53; their petition in-
troducing Alfred as their founder
(1379), 54 5 tne thousandth anni-
versary of Alfred's foundation held,
(1872), 62.
University, the, of Oxford, mythical
accounts, I, 3, 6, 9, 10, 13, 24, 31,
33 ; Great Ilall of the, founded by
INDEX.
41 1
Prince Alfred, 26; moved from S.
Giles', 67.
Usher, Archbishop, Thomas Caius' MS.
left in his hands, 23.
Vastae Houses, 200, 227-8, 233-5, 277-
Vaux, the late Mr., note on the Orsna-
ford coins, 381.
Virgae and Virgatae, 256.
Vuyt-hill, near Cambridge, 35.
Waetling Street, the, a Roman road, 65 ;
, the boundary of the Dane-law, 129,
I3i>i34> J52> J92-
Walchelin, Bishop of Winchester
(Domesday), 223, 240.
"Walker, notes on the Orsnaford coins,
368.
"Wall of enceinte ; early fortifications,
117; mural mansions and repair of
walls, 224, 236 ; line of enceinte, 232 ;
towers and character of the fortifica-
tions, 236, 258-60 ; north ditch,
237-
Wallingford, crossing at, by Aulus
Plautius, 72 ; not Calleva, 66 ; boun-
dary of Offa's conquest, 109 ; burned
by the Danes (1006), 148; William
builds a castle at, 204 ; hagae at,
228.
Walter, the Archdeacon, at Oxford, 161 ;
supposed to have supplied the basis
of Geoffrey of Monmouth's romance,
191 ; may have helped Henry of
Huntingdon in his history, especially
with any traditions of Oxford, ib. ;
Henry of Huntingdon mentions him
as Archdeacon of Oxford, 394.
— Bishop of Hereford, at Beorcham,
187.
— See Gifard.
Waltheof taken by William to Nor-
mandy, 187.
Walton, lands at, granted by Robert
D'Oilgi, 208 ; Hearne's fancy about,
61.
Wantage, Roman villa found near, 78 ;
Alfred's birthplace, 115 ; laws pro-
mulgated at, 394 ; the district of, 85,
• 109, 115, 386.
Wareham, houses at, vastae, 234.
Warine, the chaplain, his land at Ox-
ford, 274.
Warwick, supposed by Rous to be
Caerleon, 8 ; burh built at (913), 132 ;
same kind of mound as at Oxford, 117,
204 ; given to Roger Beaumont, 197.
Waterperry, Roman remains found near,
76.
Wedmore, the Peace of, so-called, 127.
Westminster, William crowned at, 187 ;
Queen Matilda crowned at, 196.
Wheatley, Roman road past, 66 ; re-
mains found near, 75.
Whippingham, S. Mildred's Church at,
289.
Whitehill, near Oxford, granted to S.
Frideswide, 143 ; one hyde at, 165.
White Horse, possibly mark of Offa's
conquest, ill.
Whithill, near Cambridge, 38.
Wibbandun, fighting at (568), 80.
Wick, the farm beyond Grand-point,
298.
Wido. See Reinbodcurth.
Wigod of Wallingford, 248.
William, Earl (Domesday), 223, 240.
— the Conqueror, his march to
London (1066), 186, 193 ; via Beorch-
amstede, 186; via Beorcham, 187;
via Guarenfort, 188 ; via Winchester,
ib. ; at Berkhamstead with Lanfranc,
192 ; returns from Normandy (1067),
and goes to Devonshire and Corn-
wall, Winchester, and then York
(1068), 195 ; (Domesday), 224, 265 ;
laws of, 281 ; at Abingdon and qy.
at Oxford, 303.
— Rufus at Abingdon, 303 ; and qy. at
Oxford, 303.
— See Peverel ; Evreux, E. of; Fitz
Nigel ; Ralph, &c.
Wilssete, the, 129, 1-33.
Wilson, Dr., remains found by, at
Waterperry, 76.
Wiltshire (Wiltunscire), boundary of,
&c, no, 130.
Winchcombe Abbey, land belonging to
in Oxfordshire, 243.
Winchendon granted to S. Frideswide,
143 ; ten hydes at, 165, 166.
Winchester, Anglo - Saxon Chronicle
compiled at, 123 ; a pilgrimage from
Oxford to (984), 390 ; King Eadward
and iElfweard buried at (924), 135 ;
King William visits on way to Lon-
don (i 066), 188, 396 ; spends Easter
at (1068), 195, 196.
Windsor, William builds a new castle
at, 204, 205 ; old castle at Clewer,
205.
Wine, Bishop of Wessex (655), 87.
Wing, Bucks, crypt at, 250.
Winsige, - Praepositus ' at Oxford, the
story of the stolen bridle, 392.
Witton, Rd., Warden of University
Hall, in a suit with the Abbot of
Oseney (1427), 57.
Wlfgar-coit-well, 61.
Wluric, see Leuric and Ulric (Domes-
day), 225, 269.
Woddesbofough, (?) Woodborough,in.
412
INDEX.
Wolvercote (Ulfgarcote) held by Roger
of Ivry. 255 ; name derived by 1 learne
from Wolves'-cot. 6 1 ■
Wood-Eaton, Roman remains found at,
76.
\\ oodstock, laws promulgated at, 394.
Woolstone, Roman villa found at, 78.
Wootton, ten hydes at granted (985),
169 ; road past, 215.
Worcester, crypt at, 254.
Wulfhere extends MerciauptoTEscesdun
(661), 84 ; to the Isle of Wight (675),
84.
Wulfnoth child, Eadric's accusation
against, 150, 155.
Wulfwi succeeds Ulf at Dorchester
(1053), 173; was the last of the
English bishops, 173 ; Bull from
Pope Nicolas II addressed to (1061),
395-
Wulstan, Archbishop of York, signs a
charter (1004), 144-5.
— Bishop of Dorchester (945), 138.
— Bishop of Worcester, at Beorcham,
187.
Wulwi, the fisherman, 224; his house
purchased, 264.
Wulwi, the moncyer, at Oxford, his
coins, 39S.
Wulwine, the Reeve of county of Ox-
ford, 179, 303.
Wychwood Forest, hills capped by,
108-9 » mentioned in Domesday, 131 ;
Roman road past, 65.
Wytham Hill, graves near, 63; road
across the north slopes of, 69 ; knoll
near site of battle (571), 81 ; nuns
removed there from Abingdon, 90 ;
a fortress made on the hill of, ib. ;
nuns at and near Binsey, 105 ; Abing-
don holds property at, 169.
Xenfort (Oxford), 350.
Yarnton, British habitations, 64.
York, Archbishop of. See Wulstan,
Ealdred, &c.
York, Ebrancus made to be builder of,
7; slaughter at (1065), 182; devas-
tated (1065), 196 ; the rebels at, 200 ;
WTilliam marches to, 195 ; houses
vacuae, 234.
Ziftele (IfHey), a boundary, 143.
INDEX AUCTORUM, &c.
An Index chiefly to authors quoted, but in a few cases to authors only referred
to by other writers. An asterisk denotes the reference where the full title of a
work and date or some account of the author, &c, will be found, and especially
when it is not given with the first mention of the book.
Abingdon Abbey Chronicle : The foun-
dation of Abingdon Abbey, 88-90,
318 ; charters signed by Mercian and
Wessex kings (c. 737), 107 ; Offa's
conquest (777), 109, 324 ; Beri
meadow dispute (c. 945), 169 ; death
of Bishop Sideman (977), 392 ; ac-
quisition of land in neighbourhood of
Oxford by Abingdon (952-985), 168-
9 ; story of the theft of the bridle,
(995) > 393 5 charter concerning S.
Martin's Church (1034), 164-5, 33° 5
translation , of relics . of S. Eadward
(c. 1034), 290 ; suits respecting tolls
on the Thames (c. 1060 and 11 11),
214; Godric's property confiscated
(c. 1070), 245 ; on the disturbed state
of the country (c. 1070), 204 ; castles
built by William, ibid. ; Ethelelm
appointed abbot (io7i),2i2; William
the Conqueror and William Rufus at
Abingdon, 303 ; Prince Henry there
at Easter (1084), ibid.; law-suit
respecting Botley Mill (1089), 214;
writ to Peter the Sheriff (c. 1090),
273, 302, 347 ; signature of Rannulph
the Chaplain, 302, 347 ; story of S.
Aldate's Church (c. 1140), 292 ;
Robert D'Oilgi praedives castellanus
212 ; his taking away King's Mead,
212, 339; his character, 213; his
benefactions, 215, 340; Edric the
' homo ' of Droco, a benefactor to
S. George's, 266 ; William the Sheriff,
265 ; houses purchased by Abbot
Faritius, 264, 346 ; house of Harding,
267 ; of Thomas S. John, 274 ;
Ermenold's house, ibid., also 298-9 ;
house of Richard Maledoctus, 273 ;
licence for a court, 283 ; the Port-
mannimot, 282; the Market, 278;
the ora, 227 ; iElfric's will as to
Osanig, 355 ; Osanlea, 356 ; the river
Ock, 363-4.
Abingdon, De Abbatibus ; the references
included in the above.
Acta Sanctorum (vol. viii. p. 534) :
Myths relating to S. Frideswide per-
petuated, 62 ; Bromton's date, 15 ;
on king's entering Oxford, 99 ; S.
Frideswide's journey to France and
Rome, 102.
Agas's Map (1578): Streams south of
Oxford, 118; Trill Mill stream, 299;
plan of Castle, 220; number of
houses, 233.
Aikin's Forty Miles round Manchester :
Description of Runcorn, 118.
Alfred, King : Preface to Gregory's
Cura Pastor -a/is, 31 ; Life of, see
Asser.
Amiens, Guy of, De bello Hastingensi
Carmen, 191.
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle : Battle with
the Britons (571), 81, 317; Bishop
Felix preaches (635), 36 ; Mercia
and Wessex (661), 84,317; Sumertun
taken (733), 107 ; first mention of
Hamtunscire (755), 129; battle of
Benson (777), 109, 324 ; first mention
of Dornsaete (837), 130; death of
Bishop Alheard (897), 391 ; Eadward
takes possession of Oxford (912), 116,
324 ; earliest spelling of name of
Oxford (912), 348; Tamesford (921),
360; Eadward's death (924), 135,
325; the five burhs (941), 133*;
Wulfstan, Bishop of Dorchester (954),
138 ; Bishop iEthelwold restores
monasteries (963), 139; the clerks
driven out (964), 167 ; Oskytel,
Bishop of Dorchester (971), 138;
ealdorman ^Elfthere expels monks
(975), 139 ; Gemot at Kirtlington
4'4
INDEX A UC TO RUM.
(977), 140 ; iEscwin, Bishop of Dor-
chester (992), 392; massacre on S.
Brice's day (1002), 141, 326 ; Danes
reach Cwichelmshioewe (1006), 148,
327 ; reach Oxford (1009), 150, 327 ;
surrendering of .Kthclred (1010), 152,
\\ Texnesanford (ioio), 360;
. Kthelmar submits to Sweyn (1013),
1 70 ; Oxford submits to Sweyn
(1013), 152, 328; murder of Sige-
ferth and Morkere (1015), 154, 329;
Eadmund's death (1016), 158, 329;
fourfold division ofthe country (101 7),
161 ; Eadgar's law proclaimed at Ox-
ford (1 01 8), 161,330; death of Cnut,
and Gemot at Oxford (1036), 174,
333 ; death of Harold at Oxford
(1039), 175, 333; Bishop Ulf at
Vercelli (1047). 172, 332; death
of Bishop Eadnoth (1049), 172,
332; IVylisca Axa (1050), 353;
Wulfwi succeeds to Dorchester (1053),
173; the great Gemot at Oxford
(1065), 181, 334 bis; the northern
rebels (1065), 183, 201, 334 ; landing
of William the Conqueror and his
march (1066), 187, 335 bis ; Bishop
Wulfwi dies (1067), 173, 332; the
Domesday Survey (1085), 222, 341.
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Dates of various
editions of the 122-4; al3° J86; see
also Contents, p. xiv.
Antonine Itinerary : Roman roads named,
65, 74 ; Isca, 353*.
Appianus, P. : Cosmographia misquoted
by Ingram, 59.
ArchaeoLogia : Vol. xxv, Sticas with
name Aldate's, 396 ; vol. xxvi, Oxford
coins, temp. Will. I. and II, 395 ;
vol. xxxvii, excavations at Bright-
hampton, 64 ; vol. xlii, ditto at Fril-
ford, 78.
Archaeological Journal : Vol. ii, Wheat-
ley villa, 75 ; vol. iii, remains at
Waterperry, 76 ; vol. iv, coins found
near Shotover, 75 ; silver ornaments
at Cuerdale, 370 ; vol. xix, on In-
gulph, 43 ; vol. xxiii, on Caesar
crossing the Thames, 71-73.
Asser's Life of Alfred : the original
edition, 39 ; the MS. burnt, 40 ;
the early copies of the MS., 41 ; the
spurious passage from, 46, 312; first
appearance in Camden's edition, 41 ;
Wise's edition, 40; Archbishop Par-
ker's preface, 45 ; reference by John
Caius, 32 ; Alfred's birth at Wantage
(849), 130; battle of iEscesdun (871),
115; Alfred restores London (886),
128; sovereignty over Mercia, 389;
./Ethelwerd's learning (913), 136;
Caerwisc, 353.
Beda, Hist. Eccl.\ Sigbert and Bishop
Felix (636), 36; early religious com-
munities (640-700), 88, 318; the
Meonwara (66i ,129; /Ktla. Bishop
of Dorchester (6S0), 87 ; Kings of
Wessex (C. 680), 80 ; S. /Kbba ,683),
295 ; mention of Grantchester (695),
37 ; John of Beverley (705), 56 ;
buildings more Romano (710), 261.
Bernard of Breydenbach : his reference
to Noah's deluge quoted by Rous, 6.
Bright's Early Church History : Bishops
of Dorchester, 87.
Bromton's Chronicon Jorvallense : two
Abbots of Jervaulx so named, IK.
Foundation of Cambridge and schools
of Bishop Felix before Greeklade,
14*, 37, 309 ; foundation of Oxford
by Alfred, 48, 314 ; only copies Hig-
den, 47.
Barley's Sutnma Causarum, &c: ref.
to by Caius as to the Greek philoso-
phers, 27, 58.
Burton Annals : ref. to by Caius as to
Cambridge doctor's baptized (a. D.
HO, 37-
Cadney (Nicasius) : ref. byTwyne as to
foundation of Cambridge, 58.
Caesar's Commentaries : Fines Cassive-
launi, 71 ; Axona, 353; Taniesis,357.
Caius, John, De Antiquitate Cantab-
rigiensis Acadcmiae : Iiditions of his
book, 21, 23 ; his life, 20* ; calls him-
self a London man, 21, 310 ; general
account of the controversy, 24 ; letter
of the antiquary and the orator's
speech, 25, 26 ; his remark on Le-
land's De Acadcmiis, 28 ; his argu-
ment that the ancient historians are
silent as to Alfred founding Oxford,
ibid. ; his argument on schola and
scholae. 29 ; his attack on the Oxford
Historiola, 29 ; references to the
Clementine Canons (131 1), 30 ; dis-
quisition on the name of Oxford, ibid.;
quotes Sir John Mandeville and Sir
Thomas Gray for Oxford being
founded by Alfred, 31 ; points out
discrepancies, ibid. ; general attack
on the theory of Alfred founding
the University, 32 ; the school at
Oxford an error for the school at
Rome, 33 ; blunders of later his-
torians, ibid.; argument for Cambridge
from King Sigbert's school, 37; from
Grantchester named by Beda, and
Caergrant by Nennius, ibid. ; mission-
aries of Pope Eleutherius, 38 ; the
spurious charters, ibid.
— Historia Cantabrigicnsis Acade-
miac ab uibc conditae, 23.
INDEX A UC TO RUM.
415
Caius, Thomas, Assertio Antiquitatis
Oxoniensis Academiae : Reprinted
after the author's death (1574), 21* ;
reprinted again by Hearne (1730),
23 ; life of the author, &c, 21, 24 ;
unfair use made of his MS., which
had been kept in Lord Leicester's
library, 24 ; sets forth the general
history of the philosophers coming to
Greeklade, 27 ; references to Leland
as to 'vadum Isidis,' 16 ; prints the
orator's speech, 26, 311 ; quotes Bur-
ley's treatise on Aristotle, 27.
Aniniadversiones : first printed by
Hearne, 23.
Cambridge Black Book, by Nicholas
Cantelupe : Account of, 34* ; referred
to as the Cambridge Historiola, ibid. ;
Leland's opinion of the same, ibid. ;
extract from, as to Julius Caesar
and Cambridge, 35, 311; Greeklade
schools instituted by Penda, 26 ;
liberties granted by King Lucius con-
firmed by King Arthur, 38 ; spurious
charters, ibid. ; quoted for the date of
origin of Cambridge, 58.
Camden's Britannia : extract from the
Hyde Abbey Chronicle in, 45 ; spu-
rious passage from Asser first appears
in it, 41 ; the passage from Asser
(q. v.), 46 ; description of Walling-
ford, 205 ; the Isis, 363 ; the Orsna-
ford coin, 368.
■ — Anglica Normannica Hibernica,
&c. : The first edition of Asser with
the spurious passage incorporated, 40.
Cantelupe (Nicolas) : see Cambridge
Black Book.
Capgrave : Life of S. Neot, ref. by John
Caius, 28 ; legend of S. Frideswide in
the Acta Sanctorum, 101.
Catalogue of Cottonian MS. by Smith :
in re ancient MS. of Asser, 40.
— by Planta : in re Osney Cartulary, 91.
Cirencester, Richard of, the forged
Itinerary of: followed by Stukeley,
Hussey, &c, 66, 77.
Cyprian Leowitz : quoted by Twyne,
59 ; quotation misunderstood by In-
gram, ibid.
De Caumont statistique Monumental de
Calvados : Name of Robert D'Oilgi,
248.
Domesday Survey : date of the com-
pilation, 222* ; extent and contents of
volume, 382 * ; Exon Domesday and
Inquisitio Eliensis, 223; first page
of the Oxfordshire portion, 223-5,
341, 382, and frontispiece ; reference
to Oxford in other parts of the Survey,
228; titles of Bishop of Lincoln,
217 ; property of Robert D'Oilgi, 226.
248, 344 ; of S. Frideswide, 105, 143*
262, 345; of Earl Eadwin, 226; of
Earl Alberic, 239-40 ; of Earl Wil-
liam, 240 ; of Abbeys of Ensham,
Battle, &c, 242, 244 ; of the Earls of
Mortain, Chester, and Evreux, 244-5 >
of Henry of Ferrieres, 245-6 ; of Ed-
ward of Salisbury, Ernulph of Hes-
ding, BerengerofTodeni,Milo Crispin,
246-7 ; of Roger of Ivry and others,
255-6 ; manors possibly connected
with other tenants of Oxford man-
sions, 257, 266, 269-73 ; manors be-
longing to Oxford mansions, 239, 244,
257 5 Wychwood, 131 ; Scotore, 348 ;
Ospringes, 355 ; Oselei, &c, 356 ;
Tameseford, 361 ; Horseforth, 378 ;
Estrighoiel, 294 ; Somertun, 391 ;
laws promulgated at Oxford, 280 ;
title of Bishop of Lincoln, 217 ; Jews
names, 257 ; sheriffs, 301 ; the sex-
tary, 227; thevirgate, 256; mansiones,
&c, 236; ditto, hospitatae, 249;
term vastae, &c, 234.
Duchesne, Hist. JVorm. Scriptores. See
Orderic Vital ; William of Poitiers ;
of Jumieges, &c.
Dugdale's Monasticon : transcript of S.
Frideswide's charter, 91, 92, 166;
Osney charters, 202, 209, 211, 274;
king's writ as to translation of the
see from Dorchester, 217, 340; En-
sham charters, 242, 243, 273, 344,
345> 395 ; Jervaulx, Abbots of, as to
Bromton, 15; Battle Abbey, 243;
Westminster charter in re Sawold,
271 ; Greyfriars Oxford charters, in re
blocking the town-way, 298 ; S. Mil-
dred's Church at Canterbury, 289 ;
Bishop ./Ethelric at Ramsey, 395 ;
Earls named Algar, 390 ; Oxenford
Surrey, 3^1 ; Tamiseford, 361.
— Warwickshire : Dugdale accepts
Rous' fictions, 18.
. Dunkin's history of Bicester : account
of Aldchester, 77.
Durham, Simeon of, Historia Regum :
Eadward taking Oxford (912), *I25,
325 ; murder of Sigeferth and Mor-
kere(ibi5), 154; William's march to
London (1066), T87 ; Caer Wise, 353.
— Continuation of History of : Ranulph
the chaplain, 302.
— writers ( Tres Dunelm. Script^) in re
John of Bury, 60.
— Book, or Boldon Book, 383.
Eadmer's Vita Audoeni : description of
the confessio at Canterbury, 252.
Eadwardi Regis Vita : the northern
rebels (1065), ^2, 201.
41 6
INDEX AUCTORUM.
Eliensis Liber : Bishop Eadnoth's death,
. 395-
Ellis' Introduction to Domesday : siege
of Oxford. 200 ; term z/iansio, 236.
Evesham, Chronicon Abbatiae de : S.
Egwin's relics, 218, 341.
Euloginm Historiarum : Merlin's pro-
phecy, 19; quoted by John Cains as
to Ridohen, 30 ; Thame and Isis, 362.
Faden's map of Oxford : houses and
population (1789), 229, 232.
Fountaine, Sir Andrew, Numismata
Anglo Saxonica : The Orsnaford coin,
368.
Freeman's Norman Conquest : Ead-
mund's death, 158 ; submission of
Oxford to William, 193.
Freeman's Reign of William Rufus :
Rannulph Flambard, 256.
Gaimar, Geoffrey, UEstorie des Engles '■
on the compilation of the Anglo-
Saxon Chronicle, 123 ; Eadward takes
Oxford (912), 126*, 325 ; mention
of Walter, the Archdeacon, 161 ;
Harold passes by Oxford (1063), 180.
Gervase, De Combnstione Dorob. Eccl. ;
description of Canterbury crypt, 252.
Gildas : ref. by Rous, 8.
Glastonbury, John of, Historia : S. Neot
and Alfred, 48.
Gloucester, Cartulary of S. Peter's
Monastery at : S. Aldate's Church not
named, 293.
Graius (i. e. Sir Thomas Gray), Scala
Cronica: ref. by John Caius, 31,
389* ; copies Higden's Polychronicon,
389-
Green's Conquest of England : Alfred's
coins struck at Oxford, 366.
Grose's Antiquities of England and
Wales : view of the chapel in the
castle, 211.
Guardian Newspaper (1872) : Com-
memoration of Alfred at University
College, 62.
Hall and Pinnell's map of Gloucester :
S. Aldgate's Church, 294.
Harding, John, History : quoted by
Twyne as to Stamford University
founded by Bladud, 60.
Hardy's descriptive Catalogue of His-
torians ; on the forged passage of
Asser, 44 ; MS. Gcncalogia funda-
toris, 390.
Haw kins, Silver Coins of England : the
Orsnaford coins, 371.
Ilearne, edition of De Antiquitate Can-
tab., by John Caius, 23 ; of the
Asseriio Antiquitatis Oxoniae Acad.,
and of the Animadversiones, by
Thomas Caius, ibid. ; Hearne's argu-
nii nts as to antiquity of Oxford, e. g.
Wc 'hereof, IJusney, &c, 61 ; his edi-
tion of William of Newbridge, with
engraved plate of Oxford Castle, 211.
Hedges' History of Wallingford : a new
castle built, 205.
Higden's Polychronicon : the earliest
reference to Alfred's founding Oxford,
47; the passage in full, 47, 313;
quoted by the Liber de Hyda, 14;
by John Caius, 30 ; by Sir Thomas
Gray in the Scala Cronica, 389.
Hildebrand, Anglosachsiska Mynt, Ox-
ford coins, 349.
Historia Regia ( = Historia Buriensis)
quoted by Thomas Caius, 28*; called
Higden's Mimic, 32.
Historiola, The Oxford : see Munimenta
Academica.
— The Cambridge : see Cambridge
Black Book.
Hoveden, Roger of, Annals : murder of
Sigeferth and Morkere (10 15), 154;
William's march to London (1066),
187.
Huntingdon, Henry of, Histona Anglo-
rum : /ftthelbald's victories in Mercia
(733), Jo8 ; Battle of Burford (752),
ibid.\ Eadward takes Oxford (912),
125*5525 ; massacre on S. Brice's day
(1002), 147, 327 ; murder of Sigeferth
and Morkere (1015), 154, 329; details
ofEadmund's death (1016), 159,330;
William's march to London (1066),
188, 336 ; removal of the see from
Dorchester to Lincoln, 396 ; river
Usca, 353.
— De Contemptu Mzindi; on Bishop
Remigius, 396.
Hussey's Roman Road : ancient road
near Oxford, 66-69, 3^5 '■> coins at
Baldon, 75 ; remains at Woodeaton,
Fencott, &c. 76-7.
Hyda, Liber de : the University of Ox-
ford said to be outside the north gate,
J3* 308 ; story of Alfred founding
the University, 45-6, 312; probably
quoted by Rous, 51 ; erroneously
quoted by Plot, 67 ; Ethclward's
learning, 136 ; Ealdorman ^Ethelmar's
grant to Cricklade, 12.
Ingram, Memorials of Oxford : adopts
most of the myths, 61 ; Appian and
Cyprian, 59 ; Alfred's mint, 366.
Ingulph's Chronicle : Ingulph at Oxford,
43. 197, 387-
Jumieges, William of: William's march
via Warengford, 189, 337.
INDEX AUCTORUM.
417
Kelham's Domesday Book, illustrated :
Domus and Mansio, 235.
Kemble's Codex Diplomaticus : refer-
ences to yEthelred's title of Dux
Mer riorum, 131 ; iEthelred's charter
of S. Frideswide (1004), 166 ; foun-
dation of Ensham (1005), 170; S.
Martins Church (1034), 165 ; depu-
tation from Canterbury to Harold at
Oxford (c. 1039), 175, 333 ; -dSIfgtfu's
gift to Canterbury, 2 40 ;Wlfwi,orWlsi,
Bishops of Dorchester (1053), 176,
1 79 ; charters relating to Oxfordshire
(1053-66), 179; Eadward's charter
referring to his birth at Islip, 176,
333 ; references to Berkhamstead,
192 ; places beginning with Ox, 350 ;
Oxangehaege, 356 ; the river Ouse,
357 ; Tamu Villa, 361.
Kennett's Parochial Antiquities: ac-
count of Aldchester, 77 ; Eadward's
font at Islip, 1 77 ; Nigel D'Oilgi con-
stable of Oxford, 304; assigns 11 32
as the date of the charter respecting
the churches, 285.
King's Vestiges of Oxford Castle : the
Keep, 203 : S. George's Crypt, 211 ;
conjectural plan of castle, 220.
Lappenberg's History of England : siege
of Oxford, 195.
Leland's Itinerary : coins found at Dor-
chester, 74 ; description of Walling-
ford, 205 ; Fritheswiglia, 102 ; Eldad,
291 ; S. Budock's Church, 296 ; the
Isis, 362.
— Collectanea : Institution of canons
at S. Frideswide (1049), l67-8, 332.
— Cygnea Cantio : Caleva, 16 ; Granta,
34 ; opinion of the Cambridge Black
Book, 25 ; the Isis, 362.
— Three passages supposed to represent
a note to Polydore Virgil, 16, 27, 309;
a work 'De Academiis? referred to by
Thomas Caius, 28 ; ref. to in Vita
Alfredi by Twyne, 16.
Loggan's map of Oxford : the Trill Mill
stream, 299.
Londincnsis : a name assumed by John
Caius, 2i.
Longmate's map of Oxford: S. Aldgate's
Church, 294.
Lydgate : ref. by Twyne to in re foun-
dation of Cambridge, 58.
Malmesbury, William of, Gesta Regum :
Chenulph or Ceolwulf, Bishop of Dor-
chester (c. 900), 389 ; yEthelward's
learning (924), 136, 326 ; Oxford
subject to the laws of Sweyn (10 13),
153, 328 ; the murder of Sigeferth
and Morkere (1015) confused with
S. Brice's Massacre (1002), 146, 336 ;
^Ethelred's Charter referred to, 93,
146; which he says he himself saw,
94*; King Eadmund's death (10 16),
159, 330; character of Eadric, 394;
Translation of S. Mildred (1030),
289, 347 ; William's march to London
(io66\ 188, 336 ; Eadwine and Mor-
kere depart to Northumbria (1066),
188, 193 ; siege of Exeter, 196, 338 ;
in Savile's edition ' Exonia ' made to
read ' Oxonia,' 197.
— Gesta Pontificum : Bishop of Dor-
chester (737-869), 138 ; summary of
life of S. Frideswide, 94*, 323 ; refuge
taken by the Danes in S. Frideswide's
Church (1002), 146, 323 ; Remigius
and the Bishopric of Dorchester (c.
1072), 216 ; Bishops at the consecra-
tion of Lanfranc (1070), 217; state
of Dorchester (c. 1 120), 171.
— De Antiquitatibus Glastoniae ; er-
roneous ref. to by Twyne and Wood,
48» 95*-
Mandeville, Sir John ; Travels : ref. to
by John Caius, 30.
MSS. Bodleian :— MS. Laud No. 114.
Life of S. Frideswide, 9$*-ioi,323 ; —
E. Mus. 93 ; gift by Remigius of a
vessel, 216 ; — MS. No. 1073. Letter
from Pope Formosus in the Leofric
Missal(896),392 ; — Charters, Oxonea,
359-
— Cotton ; Vitellius E. xv., Oseney
Cartulary, 92*, 315 ; Nero E. I., 95*.
See also Oxford Statuta. 1 1 ; Roches-
ter annals, 167 ; Brompton, 309;
Rous, 306; Abingdon Chron., 318;
Wykes Chron., 206.
— Lansdowne. See S. Frideswidae Vita,
99* 103.
— Ch. Ch. Oxford. See S. Frideswide,
Cartulary, 93*.
— C.C.C. Oxford. See S. Frideswide
Cartulary.
— Record Office. See Oseney Register,
-207* : Petition to Parliament : Rolls,
Patent, Close, &c, &c.
Monmouth, Geoffrey of, Historia Bri-
tonum : story of Mempric, 7*, 306 ;
fanciful names, 8, 306 ; story of Gur-
guntius Brabtruc, 9 ; Boso Devado-
boum in the camp of King Arthur.
18, 310 ; Boso Ridocensis, ibid. ;
Ridohen, 19 ; the Bull and the walls
of Oxford, ibid. ; reference to Walter
the Archdeacon, 161 ; the name
Eldad, 291 ; the name Budec, 296.
Monument a Historia Britannica : notes
on the forged passage in Asser, 42,
44 ; map of Roman Britain, 385 ;
See also Antonine Itinerary, Notitia,
e e
8
INDEX AVCTORUM.
Florence of Worcester, Asser, Simeon
of 1 Hirham, &c.
Munimenta Academica Oxoniensia : the
Historiola^ 13, 14, 26,307*.
Munimenta GildJiallae Londinensis : S.
Mildred's Church in London, 289 ;
Churches named from gates, 294.
Necham Alexander, dt natura rerum :
curious references to Merlin's pro-
phecy, 19, 60.
Notitia utriusque Imperii : Britannia
Prima, 65 ; absence of references to
South of Britain, 74.
Numismatic Chronicle : Coins found at
Cuerdale with the word Orsnaford,
367, 37o> 374. 376.
Orderic. See Vital.
Orosius : on Caesar's campaign, 72 ;
mention of Tamesis, 358.
Osbern's life of S. Neot, ref., 32.
Oseney Annals: Castle built (io7i),202*,
204 ; S. George's founded, 206 ; claim
of S. Frideswide by S. Mary Magda-
len, 212.
— Cartulary MS. Cotton Vitellius
E xv. with copy of S. Frideswide's
charter, 92* ; grants to Oseney, 274.
— Register in Record Office : founda-
tion of S. George's and of S. Mary
Magdalen's Church, 207-8*, 338,339;
Seynte Oolde, 295.
Oxford Statuta Privelegia et Consuctu-
dines, MS. Cotton, Claudius D. viii.
The Historiola, 11*, 307.
— Architectural Society's proceedings :
Wytham graves, 63, Yarnton excava-
tions, 64; Dorchester Dykes, 72;
History of Dorchester, 73 ; Little-
more, 75 ; Beckley, 76 ; Northleigh
Villa, 78 ; streams near Ch. Ch. 118 ;
Beri Meadow, 169 ; Windsor trans-
ferred from Clewer, 205 ; S. Peter's
Crypt, 251.
— University Calendar, 1885 : Uni-
versity College, 62.
— Times (Dec. 9, 1876) : a British vil-
lage, 63.
Paris, Matthew, Chronica Majora :
Siege of Exeter (1067), 198*.
— Historia Minor \ Ditto, 198-9*.
Parliamentary Petition, No. 6329 : peti-
tion of University College (1379), 54,
316*; ditto No. 6330(1384), 55/
— Papers : Expenses (1841) in relation
to the Cuerdale find, 370.
Peshall's ancient and present state of
the city of Oxford : references to
Appian, &c, 59 ; statement as to
the Regulars replacing Seculars at
S. Frideswide's (1060), 16S; Ch. of
S. Eadward, 290 ; Ch. of S. Aldate,
291 ; Monastery of S. Aldate, 292 ;
Ch. of S. Budoc, 296 ; Orsnaford,
369*.
Pitisco's Lexicon Antiquitatum Poma-
nornm : The Stoneslield pavement, 78.
Plott's Oxfordshire : Road from Wal-
lingford to Alcester, 66*, 67 ; road
near Holywell, 67-8 ; roads near
Oxford, 68-9.
Population Returns : census of Oxford,
1801-81, &c, 229-231.
Poictiers, William of, Gesta Willelmi :
William's march wVzGuarenfort, 189*,
I0I> 33^ ; submission of Eadwin and
Morkere at Barking, 189, 337.
Promptorium Parvulorum (1440) : Ox-
forth, 350.
Ptolemy's Geography : Isar, Ischalis,
353-4 i Tamaron, 35S.
Ravenna, Anonymous geographer of:
Roman names of places, 74 ; Tamese,
and Tamaris, 358.
Rochester Anna!s : MS. Cotton, Nero
D. 2. Institution of canons at S.
Frideswide (1049), 167*, 332.
Rolleston, scientific papers and ad-
dresses : Wytham graves, 63 ; Yarn-
ton excavations, 64 ; Littlemore, 75.
Rolls : Hundred Rolls. Holywell and
S. Peter's Ch. 249.
— Patent Rolls. S. Budoc's Ch. 296 ;
enclosure of road (1101), 298.
— Close Roll. Osenhey, 359 ; Hox-
onia, 350.
Rous Historia : Mythical origin of Ox-
ford, and situation in S. Giles, 5*, 305* ;
reference to the Noachian deluge, 6,
306 ; names of persons made to fit
places, e. g. Bristol, Warwick, &c,
8, 307 ; origin of Cambridge, 9, 307 ;
Rous a scholar at Oxford, 1 2 ; had
seen the Oxford Historiola, but per-
haps not the Cambridge, 34 ; treats
the myth of Alfred as he had treated
that of Mempric, 49 ; makes Alfred
establish schools at Oxford (873), 50;
to endow three halls in Oxford, 50,
315-
Rudburne Historia Major: Alfred's
foundation of Oxford, 49* ; Ethel -
weard's education there, ibid. ; Dene-
wulf a doctor, ibid\ also 314 ; quoted
by Plott, 67.
Ruding's Annals of the Coinage : name
of Oxford on coins, 349 ; Oxford
coins, 397 ; Orsnaford coins, 368,
369-
INDEX A UC TO RUM.
419
S. vEthelwoldi, Vita : visit to his tomb
by an Oxford citizen, 393.
S. Albani, Gesta Abbatum : Leofstan's
road through Chiltern, 151 ; Oxford-
shire within Leofric's earldom, 1 79 ;
William I. and Lanfranc at Berk-
hampstead, 193 ; grant of Oxonage,
355-
— Annales (Trokelowe) : Bishop
yEthelric of Dorchester, 396 ; Beren-
ger of Todeni, 397 ; Manasses de
Arsi, ibid.
S. Angustini Cantuar, Historia : story
ofS. Mildred, 288.
S. Frideswide's Cartulary, Ch. Ch., Ox-
ford : ^Ethelred's charter (1004), 93*,
142, 319* ; the monks deprived, 166,
J95> 33 T ; signatures to the charter,
142, 321 ; churches granted to S.
Frideswide, 286-7.
— Vita : In Collection of Lives, MS.
Bodl. Laud. 114, p. 95*, 101, 323.
In Collection of Lives, MS. Cotton. ;
Nero E. 5, 95*. In Collection of
Lives, MS. Lansd. 436 ; 99* 104.
Savile's Scriptores post Bedam : In
William of Malmesbury's History,
Oxonia for Exonia, J 97; edition of
Ingulph, 43, 197, 387.
Skelton's Oxonia Antigua : View of S.
Peter's crypt, 251 ; plan of the Castle,
220, 276.
— Oxfordshire: Remains found near
Oxford, 74 ; at Oddington, 76 ; at
Northleigh, 77.
Smith's Annals of University College ;
bequest of John Goldsmith (1307),
53 ; writ to the Sheriff of Oxford
(1381), 55*; plea of the college (1388),
56 ; Richard Witton's plea, 57, 316.
Speed's Map of Gloucester : S. Aldame's
Church, 294.
Spelman, Mlfredi Magni Vita, Orsna-
ford coins, 367.
Sprotti Ckronicon, Hearne's edition,
containing the Cambridge Black
Book, q. v.
Stubbs (Bp.) : Registrant Sacrum Angli-
canum, 145.
Taciti Annales: Tamesa, 357.
Taxatio Papae Nicolai : S. Aldate's
Church, Gloucester (1291), 293.
Taylor, Isaac, Map of Oxford (1750),
229.
— Words and Places : Shotover, 348 ;
Teutonic and Celtic names, 354 ;
Oseney, 359 ; Rhedecina a name for
Oxford, 364.
Thierry's Conquete de 1' Angleterre, 195.
Thorpe's Laws and Institutes : iEthel-
stan's mints (924), 366 ; laws pro-
mulgated by iEthelred, 394 ; repair
of walls, 236; Gemots, 279-80;
Shire-gemot, husteng, &c, 282 ; the
King's peace, burghbot, &c, 280-81 ;
praepositus, 303 ; threefold division
of the country temp. King William I,
162.
Thynne, Francis (ob. 1608) : quoted by
Twyne as an authority, 58.
Turner's selections from the City
Records : the Hustings Court, 282 ;
also calendar of Bodleian Charters,
q.v.
Twisden's Decern Scriptores : see Brom-
ton, Gervase, Simeon of Durham, &c.
Twyne (Bryan), Apologia: takes up
the controversy after Caius, 39 ; ad-
duces Leland's notes in support of
his theory, 16 ; refers to the copy of
Asser and attacks Archbishop Parker
for omitting the spurious passage, 42 ;
statement that the MS. of Asser was
lent and not returned, 43 ; quotes a
late passage as William of Malmes-
bury's, 48 ; his arguments for the
antiquity of Oxford, 58, 60.
Viollet le Due, Military Architecture :
'hourdes,' 210.
Virgil (Polydore), Historia Anglica :
foundation of Cambridge, 35.
Vital (Orderic) : quotes Florence of
Worcester, William of Poictiers, and
Guy of Amiens, respecting William's
march, 190-1 ; siege of Exeter (1068),
197; his life, 197*; siege of S. Su-
zanne (1085), 222 ; Richard of Curci,
248.
Warton's History of Kiddington : an-
cient roads near Oxford, 67, 68*.
Waurin, Jehan de, Chronicle : Exince-
fort, Xenfort, &c, 350.
Wendover, Roger, Chronicles : siege of
Exeter (1068), 198*, 338.
Westminster, Matthew of, Chronicle :
siege of Exeter, 199.
Wharton's Anglia Sacra : See Rud-
burne, Winton Annals, Henry of
Huntingdon, &c.
Wilkins's Concilia : Bull respecting see
of Dorchester (1061), 393.
Winchester, Book of (1 148), 383.
Wintonia, Annales de : Queen Frithes-
witha, 102, 323*.
Wise's Catalogue of Coins : the Orsna-
ford coins, 369.
— Edition of Asser, 40.
Witton's Plea : see Smith's Annals.
Wood's Annals of Oxford : transcript
of Twyne's interview with Camden
respecting his edition of Asser, 43 ;
420
INDEX AUCTORUM.
refers to Savile's edition of Ingulph,
//'/«/.; follows Twyne in ascribing a
passage to William of Malmesbnry,
4S ; Twyne'a arguments, (>o ; .Llf-
Weaxd, Alfred's son, at Oxford (913),
136 ; William the Conqueror and the
scholars of Oxford, 195; the donii
hospitatac. 249 ; assigns a date (1 1 22)
to S. Frideswide's charter respecting
thi Oxford Churches, 285.
Worcester. Florence of, History: Ead-
ward takes Oxford (912), 125*, 324 ;
JElfweard dies at Oxford (924', 135,
3 2 6 ; 1 >anes reach ( )xford ( 1 009 ),
150, 328; Oxford submits to Sweyn
(101;, ,152,318; murder of Sigefcrth
and Morkere (1015), 154, 3 _» >> ; Ead-
mund's death at London ( 1016), 1 5S ;
Harold's death in London QIO39 ,
175; Oxfordshire subject to S
(1051), 17S; the Gemot at Oxford
(1065), 334; William's march to
London (1066), 187, 335; siege of
Exeter, 196, 338 ; parentage of S.
Abba, 295 ; /Escwin, Bishop of Dor-
chester (992^, 392 ; John of Worcester
his continual or, 190*.
Wyke's Chronicle of Osency : William'.-,
march via Winchester, 188, 396 ;
S. I ieorge's in the Castle, 206*.
r y -WtcbleTjr
< /T° Tertoat
u
tesbnry
^t"- ^
,#
■^
.>,,'
^«
50RINIUM
sjmiiir***1'8
oFrOfbri, ii \\l *?/
it 1
O c
%
I s H*L
&*>
Thve ^,m
Suiodoaplf4 "'
gJDORCH ESTER o
MAP OF NEIGHBOURHOOD
to illustrate
THE EARLY HISTORY
O F
Wantage
^
Wi'i''1
, ^MMtftarfl
'^*
in
»/^«
b
3MTJ
Sca,le of Miles
jlofLeid, BE~ADH«r&
THE ROMAN HO ADS L
Ifcuversi-brB-ess , Oxford.
thoiversity"ft-ess , Oxford
CIRCULATE AS MONOGRAPH
Oxford Historical Society
cPublications3
690
097
OB
v.3
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY
mi
i&Si«l SB ■• BH I . HB
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11